Senate debates

Monday, 5 September 2022

Regulations and Determinations

Code for the Tendering and Performance of Building Work Amendment Instrument 2022; Disallowance

9:41 pm

Photo of Sarah HendersonSarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Hansard source

Well, if ever we knew the risks and dangers of electing Labor, this is it. This simply is a dirty deal. The abolition of the ABCC is the price Australians will pay for electing Labor and, might I say, one of the many prices they will pay. This proposal is a dirty, rotten deal with a dirty, rotten union, the CFMMEU. I'm not referring to the members, many of whom are hard working. I'm referring to the union bosses. We've heard many excellent contributions from coalition senators this evening about the unlawfulness wreaked on building sites across this country by the CFMMEU, the hundreds upon hundreds of breaches of the law and the intimidatory treatment to which so many are subjected by the CFMMEU bosses, including, of course, the disgraceful stories we've heard about the treatment of women.

In my brief remarks I want to particularly pick up on the comments of Senator Ayres, and I'm pleased that Senator Ayres has acknowledged the many instances of unlawful behaviour by construction unions. However, in saying that the ABCC is a failed regulator, Senator Ayres is completely and utterly wrong. That's absolutely false. I want to refer to an excellent opinion piece by Denita Wawn in the Australian Financial Review. She is the chief executive officer of Master Builders Australia, and she reflects on a time when former Labor prime ministers Hawke, Rudd and Gillard stood up to militant construction unions. This marks a very, very dark day for the labour movement led by the most left-wing Prime Minister in living memory. The likes of Bob Hawke, Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd had the guts to stand up to militant unions like the CFMMEU, and, in fact, the then industrial relations minister back in 2008, Julia Gillard, commissioned the late Murray Wilcox to conduct an inquiry into the need for a specialist construction industry regulator. In his report Wilcox concluded that the work of the ABCC was not yet done.

I want to briefly put on record that it is quite false to assert that this regulator has failed. This regulator has done a very important job, and as Denita Wawn writes:

It is disingenuous in the extreme for people who know better to assert that the primary focus of the ABCC has been to stop construction unions flying their flags from the top of cranes. Since it was re-established in 2016, the ABCC has brought more than 100 cases to court, and only one involved the display of construction union motifs. Overall—

as a result of the work of the ABCC—

the courts have found more 2500 breaches of the law by construction unions which resulted in more than $16.5 million in fines.

The courts have found there to have been:

              So this regulator has done a very good job at maintaining the law, at regulating the militant unions and, of course, in ensuring that our construction sector thrives.

              Shame on the Prime Minister, Mr Albanese, shame on Labor senators opposite and shame on the labour movement for not having the same courage that former Prime Minister Bob Hawke had, that former Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard had to stand up to the very worst elements of militant unions. The Labor Party have done a rotten, dirty deal. This is our fifth-largest industry which employs more than 1.1 million workers and Labor are happy to wind the clock back decades and put all of that at risk. And, yes, they got their dividend: $16.3 million in donations. The unions now have the Labor Party on the hook to abolish the ABCC. This is an utter disgrace. Thank you very much.

              Comments

              No comments