House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Bills Construction Industry Commissioner Bill Construction Industry Commissioner Bill Construction Industry Commissioner Bill Second Reading Second Reading Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 22 March 2023.) Mr TEAGUE House of Assembly Heysen Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (10:37): I rise to support the bill at this time to urge the house to progress debate to vote on the bill today and to take the opportunity to pass this bill into law. The Construction Industry Commissioner Bill 2022 tells a story in its title. It has been with us now throughout the course of this parliament, and it arose in circumstances of what were credibly described as looming clouds over the construction industry in this state now more than two years ago. I will turn in a moment to the prescient words of Will Frogley back in 2022, and then this house ought to take very seriously the words of wisdom of Will Frogley expressed in July of this year of what has, in fact, come to pass in terms of the difficulties that have beset the construction industry and construction sites, the result of the very vices that Will Frogley was flagging two years ago. Let me just make it very clear: this bill is not a piece of legislation that is somehow about union bashing or indeed— Members interjecting: Mr TEAGUE House of Assembly Heysen Mr TEAGUE: I hear some sounds opposite; I am very sincere in that regard. This is not a bill that is essentially about union bashing or, indeed, going to the necessary work that now confronts both the state and the commonwealth in terms of getting to grips with what has been truly extraordinarily intolerable, allegedly criminal thuggish behaviour of one union in particular, the CFMEU—and more about that in a moment. This is about establishing a commissioner—just have a look at clause 7 of the bill—whose purposes and functions are all about fostering a healthy and thriving construction sector in this state, something that we all ought to be able to embrace and get behind and, indeed, in the present circumstances, something that the Malinauskas Labor government might do well to take as an opportunity to turn around what it has acquiesced with for the entire period in which it has been in government, indeed, going back before that because, of course, state Labor here in South Australia has been on the take from the CFMEU since before the election. The CFMEU provided a donation in cash of $125,000 to SA Labor and it took until August of 2022 for Malinauskas Labor to return the donation. So we know that state Labor has been in receipt directly of donation from the CFMEU and that donation has had to be returned, and that was the story of 2022. We know what went on in parallel—and I am not being in the least bit inflammatory in this respect—we are seeing in the context of legislation that the state Labor government wants to bring to this place the regulation of political donations because we saw in parallel to that donation of $125,000 from the CFMEU to state Labor a concerted campaign by the CFMEU run in parallel which any interested observer would have no difficulty in identifying as having made a significant contribution to the campaign at the last election. So state Labor knows all about what it is like to be closely understanding, working in close association with and being the beneficiary of union activism and that particular union about which Will Frogley had, among so many others, belled the cat very early and we saw his words of wisdom in recent weeks. Let me refer—this is particularly important—to remarks of Sir John Carrick back in 1986 in the federal parliament. He, as is well known, is a legend of public life and he always made the point, up front and centre, when dealing with matters of regulation in the trade union movement that trade unionism in Australia is something that ought to be understood, its place ought to be recognised and its proper role ought to be allowed to thrive. Let me quote from Sir John Carrick's contribution to the debate in the federal parliament in the Trade Union Training Authority Amendment Bill of 1986. He said, regarding trade unionism in Australia, that what we need to do in looking at the bill and those matters that relate to trade unionism in Australia is to: …ask ourselves what role should be played by trade unionism in the future. We ought to face up to the need to eliminate the extremes. However, we should fundamentally preserve that role which was designed in the past for trade unionism. That role, of course, was an industrial one; it was not political. It was not a role of interference with management. It was a role which was designed to help union officials ensure that members of a union should have good working conditions in terms of monetary reward, amenities and, of course, the environment in which they work. In fact, over decades trade unionism has brought a considerable benefit to the people of this country. He goes on and it is not his only remarks. I commend the contribution of Sir John Carrick in terms of characterising the proper role of trade unions. But what we have seen in this state and in the nation over the two years that this bill has sat on our Notice Paper is the very opposite of what Sir John Carrick describes as the proper role for trade unions. What we have seen is the application of thuggery to the distortion of the construction industry, and absent this commissioner being able to be a point of reference for those who would highlight such bad behaviour, the problem is that the rot has set in over these two years. What did Will Frogley have to say back in 2022? Will Frogley saw it coming. He said back in November 2022, in warning that bad behaviour would ramp up in SA: Reports are that we're already seeing it on sites in South Australia… There's a lot more pressure on people in construction in South Australia to do what the union wants (them) to do, whether that's being a member (or) signing up to their agreement. He said the union had been 'emboldened' and were 'flexing a bit of muscle'… The concern now is 'are there going to be consequences for breaking the law without a specialist watchdog?' That was 2022. What did Will Frogley have to say on 15 July 2024, in a piece that I commend to all members? He said, and this was published in the South Australian press: I've seen evidence of at least one SA CFMEU representative brazenly standing over a local business recently. The message was simple: If the business didn't ensure his workers joined the union they wouldn't be allowed on work sites. The business would also miss out on future contracts. That's where we're at now in SA. It is a disgrace. Will Frogley has called it out. We on this side are calling it out. We need to do better in this state to ensure that a union such as the CFMEU does not go around flexing its muscles insisting that you join the union or you are out, and insisting that there be these distortion effects on the industry, with the result that we know that we are seeing construction costs go through the roof. We know that we see workers, contractors and participants in the industry living in fear of the consequences of them not toeing the line from this sort of behaviour, and we see the very opposite of the proper role that Sir John Carrick so well articulates for unions in this country. In these particular circumstances, a bill that has been on the Notice Paper for now the bulk of this parliament ought be progressed and passed today. At the very least, if the government will not do that, it ought to commit to bringing its own legislation to this parliament and having it pass so that we can have such a commissioner active in this state as a matter of urgent priority. Ms HOOD House of Assembly Adelaide Ms HOOD (Adelaide) (10:47): I move: That the debate be adjourned. The house divided on the motion: 21 12 8 Ayes	21 Noes	12 Majority	9 AYES Andrews, S.E. Bettison, Z.L. Boyer, B.I. Brown, M.E. Champion, N.D. Clancy, N.P. Close, S.E. Cook, N.F. Fulbrook, J.P. Hildyard, K.A. Hood, L.P. (teller) Hughes, E.J. Hutchesson, C.L. Koutsantonis, A. Michaels, A. O'Hanlon, C.C. Pearce, R.K. Picton, C.J. Savvas, O.M. Thompson, E.L. Wortley, D.J. NOES Basham, D.K.B. Batty, J.A. Brock, G.G. Cowdrey, M.J. Cregan, D.R. Ellis, F.J. Patterson, S.J.R. Pederick, A.S. Pisoni, D.G. Pratt, P.K. Teague, J.B. (teller) Telfer, S.J. PAIRS Malinauskas, P.B. Whetstone, T.J. Odenwalder, L.K. Tarzia, V.A. Stinson, J.M. Hurn, A.M. Szakacs, J.K. Gardner, J.A.W. Motion thus carried; debate adjourned.