Here we go on the ABCC merry-go-round again.
In 2001, the Howard government established the Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry headed by Terence Cole QC.
Commissioner Cole’s final report was tabled in parliament in March 2003, and found evidence of – among other things – widespread inappropriate payments, disregard of safety regulations, threatening conduct, under-payment of workers and tax evasion.
The total cost was $58.61 million with more than $21 million spent on legal and audit costs, around $8 million on information technology, over $4 million on rent and $3 million on travel expenses.
Despite a finding of widespread lawlessness, it found no evidence of criminal activity and led to no prosecutions, the main result being the establishment of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, an independent statutory authority responsible for monitoring and promoting workplace relations in the Australian building and construction industry.
The ABCC, who had controversial coercive interrogation powers, operated from 2005 to 2012. Not one criminal conviction was recorded as a result of its information over its seven years in existence.
Deputy Police Commissioner Graham Ashton told a Senate hearing In March 2014 that the building watchdog provided it with 15 referrals, about two a year. Only one led to a finding of guilt. The offender was placed on a diversion program.
The Heydon Royal Commission, commissioned by Tony Abbott to try to smear Julia Gillard and Bill Shorten in particular and unions in general, cost $46 million dollars. As of July, a taskforce led by the Australian Federal Police and attached to the inquiry has charged just 12 people – with five already escaping conviction. The one guilty conviction resulted in a suspended sentence.
For some reason, it says on the Liberal Party page “As at March 2016, there were over 100 officials of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) before the courts for allegedly breaching workplace laws.” Like so many of their claims, that appears to be completely untrue.
The last Budget allocated $6 million more for the AFP-Victorian Police joint taskforce, which currently has outstanding cases against a grand total of six unionists (though Kathy Jackson may have made that seven – finally). By contrast, taskforce Argo in Queensland, focused on child exploitation, has a budget of $3 million.
Malcolm Turnbull sent us to an election, costing a lot of money, supposedly because of the necessity of bringing back the ABCC. I am not certain how much he has allocated to run it but an earlier budget gives us an idea: “The ABCC will cost Australian taxpayers $165.4 million for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12, under budget forward estimates.” That was 10 years ago.
Mr Turnbull claimed that the ABCC led to productivity gains of 20% – a claim that is entirely made up as shown in this Crikey article.
In February this year, the Law Council of Australia made a submission to the Senate regarding the proposed ABCC legislation:
A number of features of the Bill are contrary to rule of law principles and traditional common law rights and privileges such as those relating to the burden of proof, the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to silence, freedom from retrospective laws and the delegation of law making power to the executive. It is also unclear as to whether aspects of the Bill which infringe upon rights and freedoms are a necessary and proportionate response to allegations of corruption and illegal activity within the building and construction industry. For these reasons, the Law Council’s primary recommendation is that the Bill not be passed in its current form.
But, as we know, George Brandis doesn’t take advice – he just assures us that everyone agrees with everything he is doing, no oversight or second opinions necessary… or even tolerated.
We are on a never-ending cycle f inquiries which all say there are problems but very rarely find anyone to prosecute. The unions have had more successful prosecutions than the various investigative bodies have and have also sacked people found to have done the wrong thing.
Why not try the novel idea of working with the unions to devise better regulations and easier rules that would address sham contracting, enterprise bargaining, workplace safety and the many other issues where there have been problems. Rather than trying to destroy unions, let them help clean out bad practice and improve accountability.
The government should be on the same side as the unions, protecting the people from exploitation and keeping them safe. That is their job after all though one could be forgiven for thinking they were venture capitalists whose only goal was to protect “risk takers” and maximise their profits.
Mums and dads don’t matter – only mum and dad investors.
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
