James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Government Waste Reduction) Share this | Hansard source

Let me start by saying that I regret not having the opportunity, as many members do, to have contributed to the second reading debate on this bill. It's always disappointing when so many of us that work hard to get elected to this chamber miss out on an opportunity to make a contribution at the second reading stage. It's certainly outside the principles of the way in which we debate in this parliament. No-one can forget the criticism in the last parliament, from those that are now employing these tactics, when similar things occurred. I've got just as much right as they did to make that point at the commencement of my remarks, when they mete out those sorts of tactics against the opposition.

But I welcome the fact that the government is bringing a piece of legislation into this parliament that is attempting to address the latest serious examples of egregious conduct by the CFMEU. And these are not unbelievable revelations of the moment, as some in the government might seek to claim, but simply the manifestation of conduct that is being continued by the union movement in this industry before they even went by the name CFMEU. We all know the history of these unions, back to the BLF days in the 1980s and before, even way back to the Second World War and the sort of conduct that the union movement engaged in in obstructing the war effort. There was outrageous conduct on the water front, obstructing the supply of materials and other important elements of supporting our troops in Papua New Guinea, which is extremely well documented and well understood. So this sort of conduct is nothing new, but it's as egregious now as some of the worst examples throughout history. We certainly welcome the opportunity to support this legislation. It's better late than never.

I join the lament of other colleagues that the ABCC was repealed by this government and make the same point that so many have—that when the CFMEU gave money to the Labor Party they weren't donations; they were investments. They were investments in policy outcomes and a policy agenda. At the top of that list was the repeal of the Australian Building and Construction Commission. We've come to find oh-so-clearly how necessary that body was. I remember some of the comments made by the now government about the need for integrity in politics. Nothing was better focused on ensuring integrity in the construction industry than the ABCC that they repealed.

We have an interesting circumstance. It is very rare for the Liberal Party and the Labor Party to be voting together on a matter of industrial relations. In this parliament today we happen to be on the same page. So it's an even starker reflection on the one political party in this country that doesn't support this bill—that being the Australian Greens. Boy, have they come a long way since they were an environmental movement focused on protecting the Franklin River in Tasmania and a number of other very worthy things to argue for. They have become, in effect, a camouflaged Communist Party in this country. Their agenda and the things that they stand for are nothing to do with a focus on environmentalism and the things that Bob Brown focused on and took inspiration from when he created that party. They have been infiltrated by the forces of political ideology on the hard, extreme left. We see it manifest in many positions that they take on public policy and, in particular, in this debate on industrial relations. To think that they could sit there, four of them, voting against the passage of this bill when even the Labor Party, which has been owned by the CFMEU for decades, is bringing this legislation into the House and, in fact, expediting its passage through the House through the guillotining of debate. The Greens should reflect on who they are now if their position is that they're on the hard left of the Labor Party on industrial relations.

When we go to the people at the upcoming election, I look forward to talking to my constituents in my electorate of Sturt about just who the Greens are these days and what the Greens stand for these days. They are a wealth redistribution party. They are a hard-left party with a dangerous ideology on some of the most significant and important issues of our future. They want to get rid of the submarine program. They want to slash defence expenditure and get rid of funding for private schools and private health insurance. That's who they are. Their behaviour in this debate tells you everything that you need to know about the Greens. On that basis, we commend the passage of this bill through the House.

See this speech in context