Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment, Senator Abetz, and relates to the government's intention to re-establish the Australian Building and Construction Commission. Can the minister advise the Senate how the proposed compulsory examination powers of a re-established ABCC compare with equivalent powers of other government agencies?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator McKenzie for her question. The proposed compulsory examination powers of the Australian Building and Construction Commission are both reasonable and employed by a broad range of government agencies such as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, the Australian Taxation Office, Centrelink and Medicare. All of them had these powers to compulsorily examine witnesses throughout Labor's government over the past six years.

In almost every respect the existing powers of these agencies are comparable to, if not stronger, than those proposed for the ABCC. For example, the ABCC would not be permitted to exercise its powers unless it 'had reasonable belief relating to a specific investigation'. In contrast, ASIC only needs a reasonable suspicion that relates to an anticipated investigation. Examination notices issued by the ABCC must provide at least 14 days written notice, whereas ASIC may lawfully exercise its powers without a single day's notice.

On penalties, if a person fails to comply with a notice issued by the ABCC the penalty is potentially six months imprisonment. With ASIC it is up to 24 months imprisonment and a maximum fine of $17,000. It is worth noting that the ABCC would be the only government agency of those previously mentioned, where the right to have a lawyer is expressly included industry in the legislation. Together with conduct money—(Time expired)

Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How generous of you!

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This shows the very tempered approach we have taken.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a supplementary question. Will the minister inform the Senate why it is necessary for a re-established ABCC to be vested with these compulsory examination powers?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Senator McKenzie might be aware, it is important that these powers be granted to the ABCC. One example is a flyer being distributed on building sites by the CFMEU, which I seek to table. According to the flyer distributed by the patron union of the Victorian Leader of the Opposition, 'If FWBC inspectors come to your site, don't approach or talk to them, don’t take part in an interview. Your employer cannot direct you to take part in an interview.' It is totally unacceptable that under the weakened laws introduced by Labor the CFMEU are actively obstructing FWBC investigations into serious and unlawful industrial activity.

Senator Lines interjects and says: 'What's the matter with that advice?' Every single responsible Australian citizen has a responsibility to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies of this country—(Time expired)

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Abetz, were you tabling a document?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I was. Thank you.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Is the minister aware of any misinformation being propagated about the proposed compulsory examination powers? If so, what is the government's response to those claims?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am regrettably aware of deliberate misrepresentation that the ABCC will have the power to drag innocent witnesses off the street and into secretive interviews. This is simply untrue, false, incorrect. The ABCC will be required to issue a written notice at least 14 days in advance setting out the time, place and manner in which the examination will take place, with the ability to have a lawyer present. A transcript and video recording of the examination will then be provided with a report to the Commonwealth ombudsman for oversight. These safeguards will ensure public transparency and accountability and give the community confidence in the work that the ABCC—

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I am trying to hear the answer to my colleague Senator Bridget McKenzie's question and all I am getting is double-dutch, or 'double-scotch', from Senator Cameron over there—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Williams. Could I ask senators on all sides to respect the answer and respect the question that has been asked.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do sympathise with Senator Williams, because Senator Cameron was chief defence counsel for all the corrupt activities of the CFMEU during Senate estimates.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Senator Abetz should withdraw that. That is a reflection that is completely untrue.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Abetz, it would assist the chamber if you did withdraw.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, we have two choices, if I may, on the point of order. We have two choices here: one, Senator Cameron objects to being called defence counsel, and I am happy to withdraw that—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you cannot debate this, Senator Abetz.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

but, in relation to corrupt activity of the CFMEU, I will not withdraw.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Abetz, I will not entertain a debate on that issue. Senator Abetz, it would assist the chamber if you withdrew the remark concerning Senator Cameron and continue with your answer.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, in that case, I will withdraw the comment that Senator Cameron was the chief defence counsel at the Senate estimates. Mr President, let me make no apology for saying that the CFMEU is a corrupt organisation.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Moore, are you raising a point of order?

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, Mr President. I will cede to Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. As I understand, the imputation that is problematic and which ought be withdrawn is the suggestion of corruption on behalf of Senator Cameron.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rather than engaging in 'he said, she said', perhaps if there were any such inference that could be withdrawn.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Wong. What has not assisted is that, every time I have attempted to ask Senator Abetz to consider the comment and that it would assist the chamber if he withdrew, the cacophony of noise coming from—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Order, Senator Conroy! This is half the problem. Have some respect for the chamber and have some respect for the chair. That goes to all sides. The Senate is deteriorating, sadly, into a state where we cannot have a question asked or an answer given without constant interjections. It is becoming an embarrassment, quite frankly.

Senator Wong interjecting—

Order, Senator Wong! That applies to everyone at the moment. Senator Abetz, I did ask, and I would respect it, if you could at least accede to my request of withdrawing. It would assist the chamber in this space at this time. You have four seconds remaining to continue to answer the question.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Abetz.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I restate: the CFMEU is a corrupt body and Senator Cameron went to their defence at Senate estimates. (Time expired)