Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to be able to speak on this motion, because at the heart of this motion is the very aspiration of a nation and a global community to achieve the good ends of a hard day's pay for a hard day's work, of people living with the dignity of work and of being able to build a better world. That's why I'm actually quite happy to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the International Labour Organization. It's an organisation that, despite the protests of the member for Cooper, is built from the idea that countries work together to achieve global ends based on our collective interests.

But we won't be dictated to by those organisations; we will simply do what we can to work together with others when it achieves our ends. Of course, the mover of the motion, the member for Kingsford Smith, particularly called on those in the government to, as he said, stop union bashing. I might remind the member for Kingsford Smith of the traditions and the foundation of the modern Liberal Party. In fact, I have on my phone right here a flyer where the author, Sir Robert Menzies, talked about how we believe in the rights of wage earners and we stand for the best wages and conditions that industry can afford. We stand for incentive payments for increased production and for profit-sharing wherever possible and practical. We stand for the right of unions to express their wishes through the democratic medium of the secret ballot.

Coalition governments have consistently supported the rights of working people. What we have never supported are the interests of trade unions over their members. We have stood by the workers, not by collective centralised interests. The member for Kingsford Smith, if he were honest, would recognise that he should not be calling for the end of union bashing; what he should be calling for is the end of union bashers, particularly where unions bash their members and their interests. That's why the member for Fisher was so prescient in his observations, particularly about the CFMMEU and in the calling out of their conduct and their misbehaviour.

When you think about the ambitions of the International Labour Organization, you think about global aspirations for the type of world that we want to live in—one where people can work, where we're free from discrimination and slavery, where people can go about living their lives freely without coercion. Do you think today that's an aspiration that shared by people like John Setka, with the type of conduct that he has sanctioned and endorsed? Whether they like it or not, the Australian Labor Party, by choice, are joined at the hip with the CFMMEU and their acolytes, and, by that continued relationship, they are ultimately sanctioning and endorsing that type of conduct.

Let's just look at some of the statements that have been made not by me, not by members of the government, but by people of independent courts, like Justice Bromberg from the Federal Court:

The CFMMEU, and in particular the—

Victorian Construction and General—

Divisional Branch, has an appallingly long history of prior contraventions of industrial laws.

  …   …   …

… there is no evidence before me … of any compliance regime ever put in place by the CFMMEU to address its long history of prior contraventions.

And what's the response? Fine after fine after fine for their conduct. Justice Burnett from the Federal Circuit Court said:

The CFMEU, as a holistic organisation, has an extensive history of contraventions dating back to at least 1999. The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the organisation either does not understand or does not care for the legal restrictions on industrial activity imposed by the legislature and the courts.

That is the despicable history of the CFMMEU, amongst many others.

When we look at the 100th anniversary of the ILO and the aspirations that sit behind it, we look to the Australian trade union movement and their political representatives in this place and say: 'How about you aspire to meet the aspirations of the organisation that you want to celebrate on its centenary? Why don't we live up to the aspirations and why don't you sign up to the aspirations of improving living standards, engaging in lawful conduct and making sure we remove slavery and discrimination?' That would be a sincere motion in defence of and advancing the aspirations of the ILO today.

See this speech in context