Thursday, 12 September 2024

Housing

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (12:08): (670) My question is to the Minister for Housing. Minister, yesterday in this place you said you would not come in over the top of industry to prescribe the way in which private matters of building and construction are undertaken in housing projects. Given the Premier has already claimed that individuals like Mr Setka are not permitted to enter government construction sites, why are you refusing to make it clear in writing that he is not welcome on Victorian government housing worksites?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:08): Let us go again: I have been very, very clear about the way in which rights of entry operate under law – very clear – and I have set out on numerous occasions the way in which authorised representatives of registered employee organisations are able to enter a site and to exercise those rights of entry in accordance with the two acts, both of them federal. Mr Mulholland, I have also been very, very clear – completely unambiguous – about the fact that unauthorised entry onto sites should not under any circumstances be allowed. If, for example, you do not hold a relevant, valid right-of-entry permit to be able to enter a site – and that is information that is publicly available, Mr Mulholland – then you should not be on a building site. As I have said, I do not care who you are. If you are not an authorised representative of a registered employee organisation, then you should not be on a site. If, Mr Mulholland, you ever become an authorised representative of a registered employee organisation, then you may wish to exercise the right of entry in accordance with the law. I doubt that that will ever happen. But as I have said, building sites are inherently dangerous places, and that is why we have industrial manslaughter legislation, which you opposed. That is why we have right-of-entry legislation enacted by the Commonwealth that sits alongside the Fair Work legislation. Mr Mulholland –

Evan Mulholland: On a point of order, President, on relevance, the question was about the minister refusing to make it clear in writing. She could go to that, but she clearly wants to go around it. I ask you to draw the minister back to the question.

The PRESIDENT: The minister has been relevant to the question.

Harriet SHING: I am going to put it on the record here: it is my expectation that everybody who is operating or in control of a worksite is administering the standards and the expectations and the obligations that apply under law to that site. If you are asking me to send a letter to people that says, ‘Please comply with the law,’ then I am very happy to stand here in this place and say, ‘You need to comply with the law.’ Mr Mulholland, if you have examples in relation to any unauthorised exercise of power that does not exist or that breaks the law, you should put that in writing to any of the organisations, entities or individuals who are in the process of investigating and empowered to investigate these matters. There are multiple avenues that you can pursue, Mr Mulholland. I would suggest you avail yourself of them.

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (12:12): It is actually legal for someone to enter a worksite with the permission of the occupier or contractor. So what I was asking for was for the minister to make that actually clear. And since you are refusing to make it clear in writing to Victorian government housing contractors that Mr Setka is not welcome on public housing worksites, will you now release the minutes of your meeting with Mr Setka on 4 April so that Victorians can have confidence that you are acting in their interests, not the CFMEU’s?

The PRESIDENT: I think that is breaching the same question rule. I could be wrong, but I believe Mr Mulholland actually asked for the minutes to be released from that meeting earlier this week during question time. I think I am right, but I will put the question to the minister anyway and she can answer as she sees fit.

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:13): I would invite you to go back. There is a cute little written record that we keep here called Hansard, Mr Mulholland. You may wish to go back to it because it does refer to your question where you were seeking both agenda items and minutes. So what I would invite you to do, Mr Mulholland, is to go back to that answer that I gave in which I said that if you have got any specific requests of any meeting that has occurred, make those requests to the people who have actually coordinated those meetings. But I will also say to you, Mr Mulholland, the meeting in question, which was one of more than 70 meetings that I attended, was one at which there were members of a number of unions present from the building industry group at Trades Hall, and in the first 2 minutes I had occasion to cross paths with the person that you have referred to as –

Georgie Crozier: On a point of order, President, the question was very clear. These questions have been very clear throughout the week to the minister. The agenda listed Mr Setka meeting with the minister in April. Again the minister refuses to release those details, refuses to be up-front with the Victorian public and refuses to answer the questions Mr Mulholland clearly asked. I know the government is exercised by Mr Setka –

The PRESIDENT: Order! That is kind of like a statement. The minister has been relevant to the question, and the minister has actually answered the question twice this week.

Harriet SHING: I was pretty clear. I attended the building industry group meeting because it is really important that we meet with unions. There were many people in attendance at that meeting, and I have been very clear about what occurred there. It is not in fact being withheld. It is a matter of public record.