|
representatives vote 2024-08-20#2
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2024-09-01 14:27:16
|
Title
Bills — Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024; Second Reading- Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024 - Second Reading - Speed things along
Description
<p class="speaker">Andrew Wallace</p><p>Before I go back to my comments on the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024, I would like to extend my best wishes to the member for Gorton: 26 years of service in this place—eight terms—is a tremendous opportunity and service to his country. I wish him well, and I look forward to working with him on the defence subcommittee for the life of this parliament.</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansardr/28027/&sid=0000):
- > *That the question be now put.*
- In other words, they wanted to end discussion and instead vote on whether to give the bill a second reading straight away. To read a bill a second time is to agree with its main idea.
<p>But to get back to the bill: I'm very pleased the member for Watson is still here—and I wish the Prime Minister and Senator Watt were still here, because they'd be able to listen to my remarks. Until the Labor Party won government in 2022, the member for Watson was the shadow minister for industrial relations for I think virtually the whole time I've been in this place. He then served as the minister for industrial relations. So, when he came out and expressed some form of incredulity—that he had no idea about the recidivism and the criminal conduct that had taken over the CFMEU: 'We had no idea it was this bad'—the member for Watson, as the shadow minister and as the minister for industrial relations, no doubt had read judgement after judgement after judgement of the Federal Court. If he didn't read them personally, I've got no doubt that he would have had many advisers who would have briefed him on those judgements.</p><p>Over two decades, judges of the Federal Court have been talking about the illegal conduct that has infiltrated the CFMEU. So I ask this question: how could it be that senior members—any members—of the Labor Party could have had no idea about this problem? Of course they knew! They just chose to turn a blind eye. And why did they choose to turn a blind eye? Well, the fact that the Labor Party has received donations in the order of $6.2 million since the current Prime Minister has been the leader of the Labor Party might have something to do with it.</p> <p class="speaker">Luke Gosling</p><p>How dare you!</p> <p class="speaker">Andrew Wallace</p><p>I'll take that interjection from the member for Solomon. As I said earlier, in another speech, I've spoken about this very thing 65 times in eight years. I've watched the now Leader of the Opposition talk about the criminal element he was exposed to at the CFMEU and the lawlessness in the CFMEU when he was the home affairs minister. Yet those members opposite pretend it never happened.</p><p>If you don't believe me and if you don't believe the Leader of the Opposition, let's just have a look at some of the cases that have been handed down in relation to the CFMEU. Now, I know the member for Watson was an ardent critic of the ABCC. The Labor Party, when they were last in government, got rid of the ABCC. And when they came back into government again in 2022 they got rid of it again, after we'd put it back in place. To sit here during the MPI and listen to the members of the government defend the actions of the CFMEU—it just beggars belief. I mean, if they want to defend the actions of the CFMEU, why are we having this administration bill? They've learnt nothing, because we know that, to their very core, Labor will always support the CFMEU.</p><p>Getting back to the ABCC: I know the member for Watson has been very critical. And the member for Watson should know—full disclosure—that I went to school with the previous commissioner of the ABCC, Stephen McBurney. Stephen McBurney is quoted as saying that the CFMEU made up $15.8 million, or 90 per cent, of the total penalties that were handed down by the ABCC. The Fair Work Ombudsman said on Thursday that since December 2022 it had secured additional penalties of more than $3½ million in cases picked up from the ABCC, the large majority of which were against the CFMEU or its officials.</p><p>We've heard and heard and heard and heard, over the eight years I've been in this place, the member for Watson and all those members opposite talking about how ineffectual the ABCC was and how it was picking up people for wearing stickers on their helmets or flying flags. That doesn't equate with the facts. The Federal Court has handed down $15.8 million in fines to the CFMEU and its officials. Are those members opposite kidding themselves, thinking that the Federal Court fined CFMEU officials and the CFMEU $15.8 million because they wore stickers on their helmets or because they flew flags? No. What we have seen, as a result of the expose of Nine, is just a sliver of the criminal conduct that is occurring on building sites in every state and territory of this country.</p><p>When John Howard became Prime Minister, he abolished the concept of 'no ticket, no start'. He believed in the importance of freedom of association and enshrined that in legislation, yet that is a constant breach that CFMEU officials continue to make. And then, of course, there's the third line forcing. There's the practice of bullying—not just giving someone a bit of a hard time but getting in people's faces and abusing them with the worst vile language.</p><p>Those members opposite talk about the importance of a respectful workplace. When we were in government, those members opposite drove a campaign against the Morrison government about having a problem with women and ensuring a safe workplace; all the while, men and women of this country are turning up onto building sites and are being abused—the worst kind of vile abuse in people's faces, with shocking language being used. People are being forced off sites. Mum and dad businesses are being locked out, not just of a particular site but of all sites that are controlled by the CFMEU. It's that sort of illegal conduct that has been identified in this recent expose. It's that sort of conduct that the courts have been talking about for two decades, and yet still those members opposite had no idea, apparently. It came as a shock.</p><p>And the Greens come in here today and talk about their support for the CFMEU. So, whilst the Labor Party has finally been dragged to this position of bringing in this administration bill, the first iteration of which was fundamentally flawed—and kudos to Senator Cash for standing her ground and forcing not one, not five, not 10, not 15 but 20 sensible amendments to that bill—the Greens come in here today still supporting the CFMEU. After everything that we have talked about, all of the bullying and harassment and illegal conduct, they still come in here.</p><p>We know that the Labor Party has received $6.2 million, since the Prime Minister became the Leader of the Labor Party, in donations from the CFMEU. How much have the Greens received?</p> <p class="speaker">Adam Bandt</p><p>Zero—$175,000 to the Liberals. You received more than us.</p> <p class="speaker">Andrew Wallace</p><p>I have not received a cent from the CFMEU. I can tell you that much. <i>(Time expired)</i></p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>I think we've now reached the peak of debate. I move:</p><p class="italic">That the question be now put.</p> <p class="speaker">Milton Dick</p><p>The question before the House is that the question be put.</p><p></p><p></p> -
-
|