Senator MARSHALL (2:58 PM) —My question is also to Senator Abetz, the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Is the minister aware of the economic disadvantage that the government has inflicted on Australian construction companies such as Multiplex, Baulderstone Hornibrook, Leighton Holdings, LU Simon and Probuild by arbitrarily changing the building industry code of practice? Haven’t the government’s actions rendered noncompliant many certified agreements applying to these companies that were previously code compliant, thereby making these businesses ineligible to tender for government projects? Can the minister explain why the government is retrospectively penalising these Australian construction companies for entering into genuine and legal collective bargains with their employees?

Senator ABETZ (Special Minister of State) —On this occasion I thank the honourable senator for the question. The Australian people know about the corruption and thug type practices in the construction industry, as revealed by the Cole royal commission. As a result of that, we engaged a task force which exposed a litany of behaviour—thuggery, illegal activity and inappropriate activity—which those on the other side, beholden to the construction unions, are willing to defend, to their great shame.

I indicate to the Senate that we as a government believed that the construction industry needed to be cleaned up. The Cole royal commission agreed that the industry needed to be cleaned up. What gave us the idea to have the royal commission in the first place? A lot of builders and small businesses came to senators such as me, indicating a legacy of behaviour that is completely inappropriate in the Australian workplace. We as a government have therefore not only introduced legislation in relation to the Australian building industry commission but also dealt with a building code. We will continue to monitor the building industry. When things such as blue flu continue to exist in the construction industry, it ill behoves the likes of Senator Marshall to get up in this place and suggest that all is rosy between employer and employee. We also know that from time to time employers are—

Senator Chris Evans —Mr President, I rise on a point of order. My point of order relates to relevance. We have allowed Senator Abetz to go on for a couple of minutes. I am happy to debate that issue with him another time, but the question went to whether or not those major building companies are now ineligible for government contracts. That is the key part of the question. Could you direct the minister, please, to address that question. Are those companies now ineligible for government contracts as a result of the government’s decision?

The PRESIDENT —Senator Abetz, you have over two minutes left to complete your answer. I remind you of the question.

Senator ABETZ —It is always unhelpful when Senator Chris Evans tries to reinterpret the question for one of his backbenchers when he sees that they are struggling. He tried to do it for Senator Wortley the other day and the Hansard proved him wrong. Yet again, today he is wrong.

We as a government are concerned to clean up the construction industry. As a result, we have an amended code of conduct for the building industry. We expect every employer-builder to abide by the law. Unlike those opposite, we do not believe that there ought to be one law for a certain section of the community and another law for another. It is up to each of those individual building companies to determine whether or not they can comply with our new building code. It would be against standing orders for me to try to give legal advice in relation to whether that particular agreement may or may not be in breach of a building code. What I can say to the honourable senator is that we are about cleaning up the building industry. We note for the record, yet again, the Labor Party’s implacable opposition to our cleaning up the industry to get rid of the sort of behaviour of the Craig Johnstons and the Kevin Reynolds of this world.

Senator MARSHALL —Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I am glad that the minister thanked me for the question. It is a pity that he did not put more of an effort into answering it. Is the minister further aware that the government’s actions have jeopardised the viability of these construction companies and the jobs of many thousands of their workers? Can the minister explain why the government changed the rules after genuine and legal workplace agreements had been negotiated by these companies? Has the government shifted the goalposts on these companies to simply undermine collective agreements so that it can promote its industrial relations agenda?

Senator ABETZ (Special Minister of State) —No.

Senator Hill —Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.