Grievance Debate

Unions

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (15:04): Last night, I spoke in this house about the links between the Labor Party and the union movement and how Labor is representing an increasingly small part of South Australia. These links warp Labor's view of South Australia, and this in turn harms our economy and the economic management of this state. Today, I want to highlight three examples of where these links have led to murky decisions by this government.

First off, I want to talk about the appointment of Trevor Smith to the TAFE SA Board. This is a bloke who has a notorious reputation in the South-East for being a thug and who, as a secretary in the CFMEU, is part of the most corrupt union in South Australia. Mr Smith was previously on the South Australian Forest Industry Advisory Board, where in 2013 he was paid $50,000 a year in an attraction and retention bonus to chair the board, even though this board only met six times a year. The board has since been abolished, and unfortunately Labor's mate Trevor Smith no longer has a gig, but here comes Labor riding through to save the day, and Mr Smith has been appointed to the board of TAFE. Labor reminds me at times of the terrible Lannister family in Game of Thrones: they always pay their debts to their union masters.

Secondly, we see the fact that no matter how many times Aaron Cartledge is found guilty of illegal behaviour on South Australian construction sites, he cannot be sacked from the Construction Industry Long Service Leave Board. This is a man who, as state secretary of the CFMEU, has presided over more than $1 million of fines over the illegal behaviour of him and his officers on South Australian construction industry sites. These illegal behaviours lead to increased costs borne by South Australian taxpayers, and we can all see it in the form of blowouts to infrastructure projects here in South Australia. But again Labor fails to act because they do not want to go against their union masters.

Thirdly, and perhaps most damningly, is the issue of the Work Health and Safety Partnership Program, an issue I have pursued in this place for a long time. This is a program that for seven years gave $1 million a year to seven unions to undertake training. It is interesting that this program was only open to unions. It was not open to industry groups, it was not open to other organisations that otherwise could have improved HSR recognition in South Australia. It was only open to unions.

Even though reports in 2011 specifically identified that this program did not target small business, where there was an issue in terms of health and safety representatives having enough training, the government did not want to move away from only providing these dollars to unions in providing them to other groups who have a better representation amongst small business. Even though the report said the government need to change, they could not move away from the fact that it is their union mates who are getting the money.

Of the seven unions that were given part of this $7 million, five of them, interestingly, are fairly reasonable donors to the Labor Party and over the same time have donated over $2 million to the Labor Party. The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union have donated $274,000; the Australian Workers' Union donated $131,000; the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union gave a comparatively paltry $52,000 (obviously Aaron is not feeling happy with the government at the moment); and the Australian Services Union gave only $55,000. The most galling is the $1.571 million given to the Labor Party over that seven-year period by the Shop Distributive Association.

We all know who owns the Labor Party in South Australia and we can rattle off all the members who are here as part of their patronage, and we can all see why. It is interesting that we found a program—and it is always under the guise of safety. Their money gets funnelled to the unions and interestingly found its way into Labor Party coffers. Can I say, though, that I really have to feel for United Voice and the Misco's, who missed out on getting cash from this program even though they, too, are significant donors to the Labor Party.

I do not know what is going on behind the backblocks, but obviously a little bit of representation on behalf of those unions needs to be put forward. The government has serious questions to answer in all three of these instances. There is not a problem with the union movement running the Labor Party, but there is a problem with the Labor Party making decisions that are not necessarily in the best interests of South Australians but making decisions in the best interests of their union paymasters, and South Australians should not and will not stand for it.