Download Fragment

Monday, 20 June 2011
Page: 6521

Mr BRIGGS (Mayo) (21:26): It does give me great pleasure to speak on this motion moved by my little friend over there, the member for Wakefield. I must say I am surprised that the member for Wakefield has moved this motion. I cannot quite work out the connection. He is obviously trying to find some connection into the Left in South Australia. We have got Don's children here in the parliament tonight. We have got the member for Wakefield, the member for Adelaide and the member for Kingston, Don's children, before us—born out of the SDA, given birth to by Senator Don Farrell, who famously yesterday wished the Minister for Foreign Affairs happy anniversary, this week being the anniversary of fundamental injustice.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms AE Burke ): The member must stop reflecting on members in the parliament and get to the motion.

Mr BRIGGS: I am just reflecting that it is a surprising motion moved by a paid-up operating member of the SDA. I will say another thing about the two former practising industrial advocates over on the other side who both referred to the 1998 workplace relations act. I thought they would have known better; it was 1996 to begin with. They were reforms moved in 1986, landmark reforms from a great workplace relations minister, Peter Reith, the former member for Flinders, a fantastic minister for workplace relations who got things done, who fixed the wharves. I notice the member for Wakefield referred to that earlier in his remarks.

This is an industry that was littered with illegality, where the rule of law no longer applied. Terence Cole QC in a royal commission found example after example of illegality which bedevilled this industry, which added cost to buildings across this country, reduced productivity across this country. The previous speaker, the member for Werriwa, has got a great connection with the CFMEU, a long-term connection which he should have declared during his remarks, although it is so well-known he probably did not need to.

What those on the other side forget to mention is that this legislation deals with both sides. If there is illegality in the system, both sides of the argument will be prosecuted. It was out of the royal commission of Terence Cole, a very well-credentialled man who those on the other side were very happy to support in 2007 when he conducted another royal commission, which may have involved the former member for Mayo. They were very happy to support his inquiry then. But when he did this inquiry he was some sort of political partisan. The truth is that he was not. What he found was disgraceful and disgusting and needed to be acted upon. That is what the Howard government did, because that is what the Howard government did when they were in government: they delivered legislation which delivered high real wages, more jobs, higher productivity. They delivered legislation which fixed up this industry which was riddled with illegality, which was riddled with behaviour which I am surprised that the member for Wakefield is supporting, I must say. It does surprise me that the former SDA organisers, Don's children over there, are so supportive of this union and its activities.

Of course, not all members of the CFMEU are bad people. There are some members of the CFMEU who are good, hard-working Australians. This legislation has never sought to take any action on them; it seeks to take action on those who break the law. That is who it seeks to take action on, that is what it was designed to do and that is what it has been doing. That is why it is an utter disgrace that these people want to take it away. I will tell you why they want to take it away. They have been talking about the corruptibility of political parties with donations. The reason they want to take this away is the donations they receive from their mates in the trade union movement. That is all that this is about.

Debate interrupted.