Wednesday, 19 March 2025

Motions

Construction industry

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (14:08): I move:

That this house notes that:

(1) the Premier, the Honourable Jacinta Allan MP, supported the strongest possible action to stamp out the rotten culture in the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) and supported Mr Mark Irving KC as administrator;

(2) Mr Irving appointed Mr Geoffrey Watson SC to probe into the wrongdoings in the construction sector;

(3) Mr Watson alleged on 60 Minutes that:

(a) the Premier’s response to the CFMEU corruption scandal in commissioning the independent review into Victoria’s construction sector (the review) amounts to a ‘cover-up’ because ‘It was hopeless. Where it didn’t go was where it needed to go’;

(b) the government, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, undoubtedly knew of the corruption and underworld influence on Big Build sites;

(c) the government failed to ensure that the review adequately probed Big Build wrongdoing;

(d) gangland figures appeared so unconcerned by the government’s response they were still profiting from taxpayers;

(4) the government failed to ensure the safety of women on Big Build worksites, where at least three horrific attacks were perpetrated and in all instances victims were blacklisted from all government worksites;

(5) underworld gangs and bikies are fleecing millions from taxpayers, profiting from corruption, standover tactics and intimidation on Big Build sites;

and calls on the Premier to immediately establish a royal commission into the nature and extent of misconduct, corrupt practice, waste and abuse of women on government worksites with the commission following the recommendations of Mr Geoffrey Watson SC.

I rise to speak on motion 879, which is a very, very important motion on shocking allegations that we have seen play out. I do not think anyone could look at these allegations that have been aired both on 60 Minutes and in subsequent media and then look at the response of the Allan government and think that this is adequate or this is taking action. It is not. We know that the government has not taken action on some of the horrific allegations that we have seen to stamp out rotten culture in the CFMEU.

I just want to go through a few things first. Geoffrey Watson SC was appointed by Mark Irving KC. Mark Irving’s appointment as CFMEU administrator and the putting of the CFMEU into administration was thoroughly endorsed by Jacinta Allan and this government. He appointed Geoffrey Watson to be a chief corruption investigator looking into corruption on CFMEU-controlled government construction sites.

The Premier really should take stock of his comments about her performance, and let us have a look at what he said. He has said that the Premier’s response to the CFMEU scandal in commissioning an independent review into Victoria’s construction sector amounts to ‘a cover-up’, because it was ‘hopeless’. It did not ‘go where it needed to go’. The government, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, ‘undoubtedly knew’ of the corruption and underworld influence on Big Build sites. The government failed to ensure the review ‘adequately probed Big Build wrongdoing’, and ‘gangland figures appeared so unconcerned by the government’s response that they were still profiting’ from taxpayers.

We and the opposition at the time did warn the government that the terms of reference of the Wilson review were too narrow. The review conducted by Greg Wilson was deliberately limited by narrow terms of reference set by the Allan Labor government, which sought to avoid responsibility and avoid accountability. Why? Because we know Jacinta Allan has been in charge and responsible for major infrastructure projects for nearly 10 years. She must accept responsibility for standover tactics, thuggery, abuse, abuse of women and the fleecing of taxpayer dollars to go toward the criminal underworld. This is what has happened on her watch. There has been about $50 billion in cost blow-outs on major projects where Jacinta Allan the Premier has been the responsible minister in charge. Why aren’t they acting? Because they are obviously hopelessly captured by the militant CFMEU and because, as Geoffrey Watson said, they undoubtedly knew. If you watched the 60 Minutes, and Jacinta Allan actually did – I hope the rest of the members in the chamber did – he said they must have known, and he said that he had spoken to senior bureaucrats who did know. He has evidence that senior bureaucrats did know. Now, are they thoroughly incompetent? I doubt they are, because they would not be doing their job as a public service if they did not run it up the chain to the minister. So what did Jacinta Allan know and what did she do about it? That is what we need to get to the bottom of.

Underworld gangs are fleecing millions from taxpayer-funded construction sites. Standover tactics, intimidation – this is why we need a royal commission and this is why this motion calls on the government to set a royal commission. When you have people as eminent as Geoffrey Watson SC saying that the government’s review did not go far enough, surely something needs to be done about this.

Some of the revelations were absolutely shocking. CFMEU heavyweights have been terrorising workers. While Victorians are struggling with a cost-of-living crisis, underworld figures and bikies are using taxpayers money to host souvlaki days and boxing events. That is not a big build; it is a big rort. They know it, we know it, this chamber knows it, and this chamber has the capacity to call on the government to do something about it, which can only be done, clearly, through a royal commission.

The only people that seem to be benefiting from major projects in Victoria are the criminal underworld. People wanting to get home that minute earlier to see their family, to see their kids before they go to bed, would be left wondering who is benefiting from infrastructure projects in Victoria. But this is because Labor cannot manage money, they cannot manage major projects, and it is hardworking Victorians that are the paying the price. It is hardworking Victorians that are feeling those blowouts in higher taxes.

We saw the Premier get up on Monday and announce that she has a new police taskforce, Operation Hawk, which was established after chatting to Acting Chief Commissioner of Police Rick Nugent. She said this new police taskforce will get to the bottom of all of this. I found that curious because governments do not establish police taskforces; police do. We found out more later, after her heroic response. After last time she said she was angry, this time she had this response and said they were immediately going to implement the recommendations from the Wilson report they have been sitting on for six months. Not only did it take a 60 Minutes report to spring her into action, even though she knew and was warned about what was happening on the Big Build, but also it took two reports to get them to actually implement what the review found. We still have not seen any piece of legislation, so at the moment it is all talk. She said that she had set up this police taskforce, only for it to be revealed that the taskforce had actually been operating for nine months. As Chip Le Grand said in the Age, surely the Premier and the Minister for Industrial Relations, who sits in this place, would have been curious about what the police have found and what the police have looked into regarding the fleecing of taxpayer money, abuse on worksites and abuse of women. We have heard nothing. It is absolute incompetence that they did not know that a police taskforce had been stood up to investigate all this. The Minister for Police seemed to know, but not the Premier or the Minister for Industrial Relations. It shows a negligence that is unheard of.

I just want to go through some of the allegations. Particularly horrific were some of the allegations about women. The standard we walk past is the standard we accept, and I think it would be disgusting for this chamber just to accept what is going on on our building sites without demanding action and without calling on the government to do something about it. For those that want to criticise and want to politicise, we have to do something about this, and I will take you through it. As reported in the Age, one woman was:

… bashed by a bikie-linked health and safety representative on his lunch break from a government-funded project in an attack caught on camera.

I do not think anyone could look at that footage and not be sick to the core.

Another was locked in a small room at a half-built state government hospital by a man previously jailed for violence against women, who smoked ice as he detained her.

A third was bashed outside her work site, also taxpayer-funded, by a man with deep connections to senior CFMEU figures and a similarly frightening criminal past.

…

Leading domestic violence campaigner Jess Hill said the Victorian government must take ultimate responsibility for violence linked to its sites, adding that inaction on bikie infiltration was always going to lead to unsafe work environments and violence against women.

“We can get tangled up in legal questions about who is legally responsible for protecting these women. But ultimately this is taxpayer money. So I think Victoria has a unique responsibility to be fronting up and making sure women on these sites are protected,” Hill said.

The worst response of all, after I have just read out those horrific stories, is what happens to those women that reported abuse, being beaten up and abused on taxpayer-funded worksites. They reported it to their women’s officer and then they got kicked off their taxpayer-funded worksites and they got black-banned from all other taxpayer-funded Big Build sites in the state.

That side, and the CFMEU, run 16 days of gendered activism and then pull crap like this. It is a disgrace. To walk past it and accept that that is just what goes on on Victorian construction sites is not good enough. I will be sitting through this debate and looking for decent explanations from the crossbench and from the government about what the response will be and whether the government will intervene to allow these women back on construction sites. Will they stand up to the CFMEU bosses, the thugs, the bikies and the criminal enterprises that have been abusing women on construction sites? Or will they just sit idly by and not get involved, not want to rock the boat? The government need to take a good hard look at themselves if this is the standard they walk by and accept as just a part of construction sites. I will be looking for the Greens’ explanation too, because we saw the member for Griffith fronting protests with the CFMEU after the revelations, after they went into administration and after what we have seen. They are all big on talking about transparency in funding of political parties, but are they now on the tote from the CFMEU due to their very political response? How can you look at that original 60 Minutes report, see the corruption going through and then have a prominent federal member of Parliament front a rally with the CFMEU? I do not know.

The chief investigator for the CFMEU administration Geoffrey Watson said the Big Build has become a place of last resort for violent criminals. The CFMEU ordered the employment at the Footscray Hospital project of an ice addict after he was released from jail for viciously stalking and threatening to kill a woman. That is who is on our construction sites. The man, Nick Bouras, is accused of subsequently locking a female worker in a small room on the site where he then smoked drugs – a crack pipe with ice in it, blowing it in her face – and locked the door to the storeroom. That was to a traffic management worker.

On all occasions these women, instead of being supported, were kicked off government construction sites and then blacklisted from all other work. What I want to know from the crossbench, and what I want to know from the government, is have they sought advice from the government and advocated to the government to make sure those women are supported? Because for all the trope we hear from this government about supporting women, none of it means anything unless they are now willing to support these women. Are they? Probably not, because that would require them standing up to the CFMEU.

Because of the amount of taxpayer money that we are seeing fleeced, we know, and Geoffrey Watson said, that ministers and public servants undoubtedly knew. We know about the ghost shifts on the Metro Tunnel. We know about gangland figures receiving money to be standover men. To get your enterprise bargaining agreement you have to deal with Mick Gatto. That is what we have heard. That is what we have seen. We know that the police asset seizure laws were bungled, so police do not believe they can use them even though they were intending to use them on construction sites. I remember sitting in this chamber at the time and saying the exact same thing: that we would support it but these have not worked in the past, and do you know if you have it right? Again, they could not give any guarantees. They still cannot use them because they keep botching them. Is that on purpose? I do not know. We see fleeced taxpayer money going to the criminal underworld, paying for souvlaki days and boxing matches. We see workers being stood over across the state, from the Mickleham Road project in Greenvale, where Indigenous labour hire companies get kicked off in favour of labour hire companies with connections to the CFMEU. We see ghost shifts taking place with particular labour hire companies. We see corruption and standover men on the North East Link project, in all parts of it.

This is not a functioning democracy. This is not what happens in a functioning democracy. Why is every other state able to get to the bottom of these issues but we cannot? Why can’t we? It has become a haven of last resort for the criminal underworld around Australia to come down to Victoria. We saw one bikie who was banned still getting paid about $10,000 a week to do nothing. And you do not think this needs a royal commission? This is taxpayer money. Hardworking Victorians are being charged for having a home business in their home because of the increase in land tax because this government cannot manage money and cannot even be accountable for its own money. Of course it is increasing taxes. This is taxpayer money, and the fleecing of it to the criminal underworld is an insult to every hardworking taxpayer.

Now, I know what the Premier will say and I know what the government drones on the other side will say: ‘Oh, the federal royal commission, they already had one of those and it achieved nothing.’ Well, recommendation 1 made it clear that we need a national approach to enforcement and regulation, which is why the former coalition government re-established the Australian Building and Construction Commission – it had a double dissolution election on it – to crack down on lawlessness and corruption. When the ABCC was established, the number of working days lost to industrial disputes in construction plummeted from around 58,000 to less than 5000. The moment the current federal Labor government got in they played along to the CFMEU’s tune and abolished the ABCC, and the number of working days lost to industrial disputes skyrocketed back up to around 48,000 – you wonder why. The royal commission also made 93 referrals for proceedings relating to possible breaches in law, and more than half relate to potential criminal prosecutions.

We see the need for this royal commission. The CFMEU administration and administrator were endorsed by this Premier and by this government. They appointed Geoffrey Watson SC to lead these investigations. He has called out this government for a weak and pathetic response. A cover-up, he called it. More needs to be done. We need to get to the bottom of which bureaucrats knew, which public servants knew, which ministerial officers knew and which ministers knew that were responsible and did nothing.

I remember sitting in this place in early 2023 and calling on the minister to get to the bottom of the thuggery going on on the Mickleham Road project. It came out in the Australian Financial Review that Jacinta Allan was warned several times about standover tactics and coercion on that said project. Then she was asked by Nick McKenzie and she said, ‘What documents do you have?’ – literal emails, requests for meetings, requests for help and assistance. We need a royal commission.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (14:28): This government does not and will not tolerate corrupt, criminal, intimidatory behaviour. It condemns what we have seen and heard in recent days with the violence towards women on construction sites. The Premier has been quite clear, and I understand she has just been making comments condemning this behaviour. Let us be really clear – let us start with that. Understood? The government is taking steps to ensure that with legislation imminent for a complaints referral body it is taking action around fit and proper person tests for people who have contracts on government sites and strengthening Victoria’s unlawful association scheme with the passage of the Criminal Organisations Control Amendment Act 2024. The government is taking this very seriously and condemns the activities or actions of those who are conducting this sort of behaviour.

I want to make the point that this sort of behaviour we have seen occur over decades – whether it is violent behaviour, whether it is white-collar crime or whether it is abhorrent acts that have occurred across various organisations or institutions in this state and across our country – and every time that happens, you have to reach in, you have to remove the perpetrators and you have to rip out the culture. We have seen it in religious organisations. We have seen it over decades. That is something that we as a society have had to deal with. We have seen it across institutions such as our banks, with the royal commission that went on around fees for no service, where dead clients were paying for services. We have seen wage theft across a variety of industries and sectors, whether it is airlines, universities or the banking sector. We all remember the Australian Wheat Board saga where there were kickbacks to the Saddam regime.

There are even perhaps lesser examples. Whether it is our sporting codes or our sporting clubs and institutions, whether it be doping scandals or salary scandals, every organisation and institution that has people doing the wrong thing in positions of authority needs to be dealt with, and all of us need to take responsibility for being on constant watch for this sort of behaviour and dealing with it.

Unions are not exempt or above any of these human behaviours that we see play out in all of these organisations, but like all the organisations I just went through – whether it is people’s faith, whether it is our banking institutions, whether it is major corporations or whether it is major sports clubs that we all may love and have a generational history attached to – when they do the wrong thing, we have got to acknowledge and lean in on that. But we have also got to acknowledge that all of these organisations and institutions play pivotal roles in our society, and they are incredibly important. It is exactly the same for unions. Whether it be retail workers, transport workers, health workers or emergency workers – some of the workers in our state who do some of the most incredible work for us that we depend on so much – they depend on their unions over the decades and over the generations to deal with issues as they emerge and ensure that their pay and their conditions are fit for the time and place where they are. We all know about the cost-of-living pressures that we have experienced with the global inflation in recent years. That just highlights the need for unions to be there to represent their workers.

When it comes to our blue-collar unions, whether that is in manufacturing or in construction, we see maiming, we see injuries and we see deaths occur all too regularly. I have got stats here of the deaths that have occurred in construction in recent years. I should not need to say it, but I will just say it to put it on the record: every worker that goes home after a traumatic incident of losing a digit or a limb is going to be impacted for the rest of their lives. In that instance, or when those workers do not go home and their families do not see them walk back in the door, that is exactly why we need unions standing up for workers’ wages and workers’ conditions. I am very proud to be part of a government that through its projects has ensured that we are seeing a pipeline of apprenticeships –

Members interjecting.

Ingrid Stitt: On a point of order, Acting President, Mr McIntosh is talking about pretty sensitive issues to do with occupational health and safety in a very dangerous industry and he is being heckled by the opposition. Nobody interrupted Mr Mulholland while he gave his contribution, and I would ask you to bring them to order.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): I ask that Mr McIntosh be heard in silence.

Tom McINTOSH: As I was saying, I am proud to be in a government that is, through government projects, ensuring that apprentices and trainees, a pipeline of apprentices and trainees, are being invested in to ensure that we do not have workforce gaps into the future. We remember the privatisation of the 1990s just decimated those pathways. I am proud that women, particularly in blue-collar industries and particularly in construction, are having more and more presence in what was a completely male-dominated industry. I am proud that First Nations workers are being supported, that multicultural communities and young people – young people who may otherwise find themselves on very different paths in life – are getting jobs on construction sites.

Working in construction is not easy. You are very hot and very cold; you are exposed to the elements. Not everyone is going to be able to go to university, not everyone is going to be able to succeed in their early education to be able to go to university and not everyone is going to grow up in a home or a house that enables them to even get a basic start with their education. So the construction sector provides a really important place for a whole lot of people to go and work and build for this state – build things like level crossings, the West Gate Tunnel, the Metro Tunnel, the big homes build, the hospital infrastructure, the sports infrastructure – the major infrastructure that this state needs for future generations, not just for here and now. Those opposite want to talk about costs of projects in one of the highest inflationary environments we have seen in probably five decades, but it is the investment now that is going to set future generations up for economic prosperity. By investing in a generation of young workers, we are going to make sure we have got a workforce through the end of this decade and next decade and that a pipeline of skilled workers is there to continue to do the work that we need it to do.

I am not going to have time to talk in detail about the things that those opposite have stood against, whether it is our nation-leading reform of the labour hire industry, whether it is our wage theft laws or whether it is our portable long service leave, which I think is just so important to our most vulnerable contracting industries. But we know that the Liberals’ economic policies are to drive down the pay and conditions of workers. That is their economic policy. We have seen that play out when they have federally been in government, and we know that that is one of the few policies they have as a party and that they hold dear. I have run out of time, Acting President, so I will leave my contribution there.

Aiv PUGLIELLI (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (14:38): I rise to contribute on behalf of the Greens to notice of motion 879 in Mr Mulholland’s name from the Liberal Party. I will state from the outset that the allegations of criminal and corrupt behaviour that we are talking about here, including the most recent horrific reports of violence against women on government worksites, are extremely serious and concerning, and that is something the Greens have said all along in relation to these matters. These are very, very serious incidents and allegations we are talking about.

All workers deserve to be safe at work. That is one of the many reasons why so many of these allegations are particularly concerning – because it is workers who suffer when they do not have strong, effective union representation that is putting their safety and wellbeing, the wellbeing of workers, as its top priority. Workers, especially women, clearly have not been safe on these sites, and that is something that is unacceptable. The violence and bullying that, we are hearing in the allegations, have occurred on government worksites at an expense to taxpayers are completely unacceptable. We understand that Victoria Police have established a taskforce to investigate these allegations of misconduct on worksites and that the Labor government are moving ahead with implementing recommendations from the Wilson review. The Greens wish to state that these investigations need to be properly resourced to ensure that this horrible behaviour is rooted out.

We will not be supporting the Liberals’ motion today. I will be quite blunt here: it is a motion that will not result in any meaningful change. It will not. It will not result in a royal commission happening. That is something for a government to enact. Instead I am quite concerned that this motion is being used as a political opportunity for the Liberal Party to use this issue as a political tool for their own benefit, to politicise our workers and the wellbeing of our workforce for their own political gain, and that is not something the Greens are going to stand for.

The government needs to ensure that authorities are properly resourced to do their job of investigating and prosecuting the matters that have been raised here. Clearly that has not been happening to a sufficient level to date, but the reality is that we have had corruption and integrity scandal after scandal here in Victoria. We have had over the years red shirts, we have had developer donations and inappropriate developer links to Labor and Liberal MPs and to councillors. These repeated scandals in Victoria say to me that Victoria’s anti-corruption systems are not up to scratch. If we want to fix these scandals at their root, we need to fix Victoria’s anti-corruption system.

The Greens have a bill to fix IBAC, to bring it up to the same standard as bodies in other jurisdictions so it can investigate all corruption, such as kickbacks, conflicts, jobs for mates, those kinds of misuse of taxpayer money. I urge the government to support that bill, but failing that, we will continue to fight to increase the strength of Victoria’s integrity and oversight systems, just as we will continue to stand with unions in their work to improve the rights and conditions of workers across our state.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (14:41): I will not say I am pleased, but I welcome notice of motion 879 that Mr Mulholland has brought to the chamber. It is an important motion, and I do not think anyone in this chamber or through the community will have been anything but shocked and horrified at what they saw in 60 Minutes on Sunday night. The comments that were made by Geoffrey Watson SC, a person respected widely, should give us an absolute cause to look closely and to listen to what Mr Watson has said.

It is important here, I think, that the points made by Mr Mulholland are understood. There is a rotten culture at the CFMEU. We knew that earlier. We had earlier warnings on that. The state government has taken some actions but clearly nowhere near enough. Labor is a wholly owned subsidiary of the CFMEU, let us be quite clear. They have got them absolutely controlled. They are fearful of moving. Mr McIntosh and people like that were put here in this chamber through preselections that were controlled by the CFMEU and other groups.

Evan Mulholland interjected.

David DAVIS: No, it is not right. Mr Irving appointed Mr Watson to probe into the wrongdoings, and I just want to quote some of the points made by Mr Watson. He said: the government’s response, the independent review – the so-called review, the review undertaken by Mr Greg Wilson – was a cover-up. He said it was hopeless in where it did not go and where it needed to go, and I could not agree more. Mr Wilson has not covered himself in glory. He is a toady; I am going to put that clearly on the record here. He is not up to scratch. Yes, there were some recommendations there that would improve the situation, but Geoffrey Watson is completely and utterly correct: the Wilson review was a sham. It was a very weak approach that the government undertook, and the government did this because it did not want the probing.

The government, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, according to Mr Watson, undoubtedly knew of the corruption and underworld influence on Big Build sites. We have got these massive construction sites, with tens of billions of dollars in some cases being spent, and the CFMEU and its bikie mates are siphoning off taxpayers money. If you go down to Parliament station tonight, there will be thousands of people going home on the train, all of them working hard, all of them paying their taxes, and these robbers – the CFMEU robbers – and the bikies are taking their money. They are stealing their money, siphoning it off so that every sensible, honest, hardworking Victorian pays more in taxes because of these corrupt and crooked bodies.

The Labor Party is part of this protection racket. They are up to their collywobbles in it. They are part of it; they know what is going on. The emails have gone in and out of ministers’ offices, but ministers do not want to move, because the CFMEU has traditionally had votes on preselections. The CFMEU, and other unions of the like but this one in particular, have made significant financial donations. And they, by the way, are not the only party in this Parliament that has had donations from this corrupt and crooked organisation. This organisation should be run out of town; it should be closed down. We need proper unions that actually help people.

Mr McIntosh was standing up there wringing his hands before, saying that workers should be able to go to work and be safe. I could not agree more. But what is so wrong here is the very people who are meant to be helping the workers are the people who are threatening them and bullying them. They are the ones who are locking the apprentices in the sheds. It is the unions, who are meant to be protecting people, who are actually the thugs locking the young apprentices in the sheds. How can this be? How can this be allowed to continue – a registered union with thugs and people connected with crooked bikie gangs?

Let us be clear: many people are very afraid. They are afraid. If you are a young apprentice, male or female but especially a young female apprentice on one of these sites, a group of bikie thugs can come to you and say you will do this otherwise you will never work again in this industry. That is what they do. They actually black-ban people. So your career in construction is over; you will never, ever get another job. An employer who may want to stand up will be fearful. He or she will be fearful about their family, their children. This is just so wrong. I cannot be clearer about what is so wrong with this. These are the very people who are meant to be helping the workers, yet they are threatening them and they are stealing their money. Let us call it for what it is: it is a mafia-like standover tactic. That is what it is. This is what happens in certain places in Italy. This is a standover tactic. You are made afraid if you stand up. You are made afraid that your brother, your sister, your daughter, your son or your dog might be threatened if you step out of line and cross these thugs. These people are absolute thugs, and we ought to be calling it out and stopping it.

I am very happy that Mr Geoffrey Watson SC has been prepared to stand up and point to the failings in the Wilson review and point to the fact that Jacinta Allan knew – the Premier of this state. She is overseeing all these projects. She has been told time and time again of this corruption, yet she refuses to act and end it. That is because the Labor Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of these parts of the union movement. Labor MPs, including the Premier, are afraid to stand up. They are afraid to say, ‘We are going to call a halt; we are going to call a stop to this.’

I thank Mr Mulholland for bringing this motion. We do need a royal commission. I accept that there have been royal commissions in the past, but this has gone on much further, with the systematic nature of what is happening particularly in Victoria and particularly on this state government’s Big Build sites. They are nearly $50 billion over budget on these sites, and is it any wonder? Money is being siphoned off on ghost shifts. The Metro Tunnel, not very far from here, will open in a year or so. It will be $4 billion or $5 billion or perhaps even $6 billion – $6000 million – over budget.

Yet there have been thousands of ghost shifts – people who did not turn up, who got paid – with the CFMEU and bikie gangs deeply and closely involved. I say it is wrong, and I say this motion is a very sensible start in cleaning up this mess.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (14:50): I rise to also make a contribution on this motion standing in Mr Mulholland’s name. I have had the benefit of listening to some of the contributions that have been made, and of course Mr Davis’s contribution, and it never ceases to amaze me, some of the things that are said by those opposite about the union movement. What we do know is that those opposite do not actually know anything about the union movement, and obviously this motion is really another opportunity by those opposite to kick the union movement and besmirch the many thousands and thousands of workers who belong to their unions, who have good unions who protect their rights at work and fight for their safety at work as well.

What I want to do is go back to the beginning of this, where the Premier is on the record as saying a number of things. If you listened to Mr Davis and Mr Mulholland, there was no mention of some of the things that our Premier has said in regard to this. If you listened to them, you would think that we condone everything that has occurred. I note Mr McIntosh went to some of this in his contribution as well. It goes to what I just said – unions protect workers. Unions are there because they have fought for –

Members interjecting.

Sonja TERPSTRA: I am sorry, Acting President, but speakers on the government benches did not interrupt any of the opposition speakers when they were speaking, and I would ask that you call the chamber to order when I am speaking, because I ask to be heard in silence.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): I ask that Ms Terpstra be heard in silence.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Thank you. As I said, unions protect workers. I and Minister Stitt and others in this chamber, and you, Acting President Berger, we have all come from the union movement, and we know what effective unions do and what they look like. Those opposite have come in here today and besmirched every worker who belongs to a union, rather than identifying what is going on here, which is that there is a small cohort of people who have chosen to take the wrong actions, whether they be criminal or corrupt, and our Premier has called that out. Our Premier back in July 2024 said:

Unions protect workers. But what we’ve seen isn’t unionism …

Those opposite would not know that – they do not know what unionism actually looks like. What they want to do – and Mr Puglielli said this in his contribution – is use this as an opportunistic attack on all workers and unions. That is what you want to do. We all know on this side of the chamber that what we are seeing is not unionism. You want to conflate what is happening. You want to besmirch all unionists and unions – yes, you do. We will not stand for that because what we know is that unions protect workers, and they protect workers from attacks by conservative governments. We can go through and talk about the history and the record of those opposite and their colleagues in Canberra and the attacks on workers and working people that they have stood by and perpetuated. This is why we need strong unions. We need strong unions, and we have a culture of strong unionism in this country. It is constantly under attack from conservative Liberal governments.

As the Premier said back in July:

… what we’ve seen isn’t unionism –

That is the difference –

it’s self-interested thuggery …

The Premier back then expressed her personal regret and deep-felt disgust at the activities that were reported and the people who perpetuated them. She also said the rotten culture should be pulled out at its roots. Firstly, what she did was ask Labor’s national executive to immediately suspend the CFMEU construction division from the Victorian Labor Party. So Mr Davis was quite wrong in his contribution when he said that the Labor Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the union movement. That is wrong. CFMEU – out.

David Davis interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Acting President, I ask that I be heard in silence.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Continue on.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Thank you. The union needs to fix its conduct and should not have anything to do with the party until it does. We have been very clear about that, and the Premier took strong action. The Premier also asked the Victorian Labor Party to immediately pause political donations from the CFMEU. Also, the Premier referred these matters to Victoria Police and the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission. When she became aware of matters, she referred them on. I make the point that you, Mr Davis, and any of your colleagues, if you are aware of corrupt or criminal activity, should also refer it on.

David Davis interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Good, and you should. But I note that you come in here and you politicise – and also your colleagues have politicised the violence that has occurred and been experienced by women – something that has been reported in the media.

David Davis interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Yes, you do. Because this government has taken strong action and the unions have taken strong action to make sure that women can go to work and feel safe in their workplaces. We have also taken strong action on family violence. These are matters that you should also support.

David Davis interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Mr Davis, it is all very well to come in and to point out there are women who are experiencing violence but it is for political purposes, because when you really need to show up, you do not. That is the reality. I say again: if you have any allegations that you are aware of of wrongdoing, violence or corruption, you should report them. Also, Victoria’s anti-corruption commission and police have the appropriate powers to investigate or refer allegations of corruption and criminal activity.

Georgie Crozier interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Sorry, Acting President, the constant interjection from Ms Crozier opposite –

Georgie Crozier: On a point of order, Acting President, I was talking to Mr Davis about the fact that he has referred several of these allegations on the CFMEU corruption to the appropriate authorities, yet Ms Terpstra keeps carrying on.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Sit down.

Georgie Crozier: And to be told to sit down – the way Ms Terpstra speaks in this chamber, I think, Acting President, you need to take control of what she is saying and doing and hold her to account.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): All right, perhaps we try this. Perhaps Ms Terpstra continues her speech without any further interruption from anybody. We have got 2 minutes, 54 seconds to go. Thank you.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Thank you, Acting President. Ms Crozier, you were not in the chamber earlier. The point was made that the government –

Georgie Crozier interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Sorry – government MPs –

Renee Heath: On a point of order, Acting President, I will remind the member that she cannot address Ms Crozier directly. She should be speaking through the Chair.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): I remind Ms Terpstra to speak through the Chair.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Through you, Acting President, Ms Crozier needs to be reminded that the government members on this side of the chamber let Mr Davis and Mr Mulholland continue their speeches in absolute silence. Acting President, what I am reminding Ms Crozier of, because she was not here, is that we asked that they do the same in reply. That is the point. I note that my clock is running down because all Ms Crozier is wanting to do is continually interject and disrupt. I make the point again, through you, Acting President, and I remind those opposite that when they made their speeches we sat here in silence. I ask that I be allowed to do the same. I will continue.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Thank you.

Sonja TERPSTRA: The Premier also said she will stamp out any criminal conduct that is brought to our attention on Big Build sites in Victoria. The conduct of unions is regulated under federal laws. The Premier has been clear. She said she will join forces with the Prime Minister to do whatever needs to be done. She said we will toughen bikie laws and make it easy for police and courts to prevent certain individuals from associating with each other. We have also talked, and there is more detail coming, about giving the Labor Hire Authority a stronger regime that it might need to make sure that it can have more stringent tests around certain types of people who are being employed in labour hire and who may be working in the construction industry. These are matters that our Premier has taken strong and swift action on.

Acting President, I note that my clock has been run down to about 49 seconds now, but in concluding my remarks on this motion I will just highlight the fact that what is disappointing in regard to this motion is that it is a political stunt. It is being used for nothing more than to attack workers, to attack unions and to besmirch the union movement that is made up of thoroughly decent, good and hardworking people and organisations who stand up for workers rights and protect worker safety each and every day that they turn up.

For the opposition to also use this as an opportunity to politicise the fact that women on worksites have experienced occupational violence and aggression is nothing more than shameful. The government will not be supporting this motion.

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (15:00): I also watched the 60 Minutes report the other night, and it was frankly shocking, especially after earlier reports when the government said that they were going to clean up the CFMEU and the union, to see shocking footage of a woman being bashed in front of a camera by her health and safety representative, of all people. The first thing that sprung to my mind was: what happens when the cameras are not there? How many more of these incidents have been happening on worksites? I mean, who could blame anyone for remaining silent in this sort of situation, when you are on a worksite where your health and safety rep, if you step out of line, bashes you? You have got organised crime running everywhere. It is just unbelievable that the state has gotten to this point.

I am supporting this motion, and it is very, very rare that you will see a Libertarian jump up and say the government should be spending more money on something, but in this case I think it is entirely justified. My criticism of Mr Mulholland’s motion is I do not think it goes far enough. I do not think it goes far enough at all, because the real problem here is not the union itself. The union is just a business unit of a larger criminal enterprise, which is organised crime, which is running this state. I have said it before, the government does not regulate tobacco in this state, organised crime does. The government does not regulate drugs in this state, organised crime does. And the government does not appear to be regulating government construction projects, organised crime is. This is just another business unit of these crime gangs, and they have infiltrated these government worksites. They have put in all sorts of criminals. Every action that the government takes, organised crime just sees it as a new opportunity.

The government passed, in the last term, the Gender Equality Act 2020. Of all things you would think, ‘Oh, well, this is a really good thing; we’re going to have procurement requirements on government contracts that stipulate you need some sort of action plan to have more women on your worksite,’ and they have got all these requirements in procurement contracts for more Indigenous workers and all these sorts of things. Organised crime just saw that as an opportunity. They set up labour hire companies that will provide that diversity quota, and then to get your EBA you go and talk to your local organised crime boss – boom, you have got the EBA. It is just unbelievable. Everything that they do is just a new opportunity for organised crime in this state. This royal commission just looking at the union itself will not fix it, because whatever is left after it gets cleaned out, organised crime will be back in there again, infiltrating it again, just like they have done in the past.

I am not against unions. I do agree with the government that unions are important for protecting workers’ rights and stuff like that. But clearly in this particular sector they have been taken over and infiltrated by organised crime. It is obvious to anyone that wants to look at it, and it is just nuts.

As Mr Davis and Mr Mulholland have pointed out, this money is being taken from taxpayers, from other Victorian workers and their children in the future. God knows how long it is going to take to pay off this debt that Victoria has. We keep raising taxes and we keep hearing of budget blowouts on projects. I tell you what, this puts a very dark spin on a budget blowout. Where has that money actually gone?

And another thing: these organised crime business units – drugs, tobacco, vaping, government construction – are not isolated enterprises. They are integrated with each other. Think about this: the billions of dollars that are being diverted from federal excise tax, because they do not really collect that much anymore since all the money is going to organised crime for tobacco, needs to get laundered. Where do you launder $2 billion or $3 billion a year? You do not go through pokies and launder it through pokies. You do not go through wholesale fruit and veggie markets.

There are in fact only a few industries in this state that could handle that sort of laundering, and they are construction and property. That is about it. I think the royal commission really needs to look at where all this money is going, and at these foreign assets. We have organised crime being controlled by foreign countries – by people from overseas. It has been reported in the media, but I have heard stories as well, that you get standover tactics. You get handed a mobile phone, and it is a phone call from someone overseas telling you what you are meant to do or else. They do not even need to tell you. They do not even need to make a threat. Everyone knows what happens if you do not do what you are told. Everyone knows what happens if you open your mouth. You will get bashed, you will get stood over, you will get an arson attack and in some cases you will get murdered, and that is what has been happening in this state.

Georgie Crozier: It is terrifying.

David LIMBRICK: It is absolutely terrifying. A lot of this money is going overseas. Where is it going? We have heard even recently that some of these antisemitic attacks that we have seen in Melbourne have actually been contracts put out on the dark web and taken up by organised crime. I mean, how far are we going to let it go in this state? I would hate to think where this money is going overseas. We know that most of the tobacco seems to come from the UAE. They do not seem to care about shipping it to Australia. Is it ending up in the hands of Hezbollah and these other organisations? We just do not know where this money is going. I think that this has corrupted our state to the point where you cannot run legitimate businesses in many industries now without having to deal with organised crime.

We have to clean it up, because you cannot have a functioning union that is controlled by organised crime. You cannot have a functioning capitalist liberal democracy that is run by organised crime. You cannot have innovation in new industries and technologies when they have been stifled and stolen from by organised crime. The government need to seriously look at the incentives that have been set up by their own policies and their inaction on stamping out some of this, and they need to look at the bigger picture. It is not just a union and it is not just government construction. Organised crime has infiltrated a huge amount of the economy in this state. In fact it is probably one of the biggest industries in the state if you add up the money that it is stealing from government construction projects, plus the tobacco industry, vaping and drugs. Organised crime is one of the biggest industries in this state, and it has got to stop.

Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (15:08): I was listening to Mr Limbrick’s contribution then. He was very passionate and very concerned about the issues that are confronting this state, and I could not agree with him more. His explanation of why he is concerned and about why this corruption has to stop is 100 per cent correct. That is the point here in terms of what this motion that Mr Mulholland has brought to the chamber is about.

We have got a serious problem in this state, and it is corruption that is so deep and ingrained in so many different areas, but in relation to the construction industry, the Big Build and the CFMEU that this particular motion addresses, it is so extreme. I think that is the concern of Mr Mulholland, who spoke, and Mr Davis, who spoke, and we have just been listening to Mr Limbrick, who also spoke about the depth of this corruption, about the rottenness and about the standover tactics and the way that business is done in this state.

It is unfortunate that there are some members of government who do not quite grasp the severity of those issues. We need to address this. We need to stamp it out. We need to really find out what on earth is happening here. We all know union members who are doing their best. In fact I spoke to one yesterday, and you know what he told me? He said that they are leaving the CFMEU and they are going into another union. The union members working on these sites are really concerned about what is happening. They do not want this either. Government MPs say that this is a politicisation and that what the Liberal–Nationals are trying to do is an attack on workers, but it is far from that.

They have families; they are concerned about what is happening on their sites. When I speak to these people – and they speak to me – they tell me what is happening underground in this city, the sexual exploitation of women, the abuse. That appalling video that was aired on 60 Minutes on Sunday night – how can anyone condone that? By a union official to a woman, and it is filmed for God’s sake. As Mr Limbrick said, goodness knows what is happening off camera. Quite right, because I have heard these stories too. I want to congratulate Nick McKenzie and the team, who have actually had the guts to really probe this issue to the extent that they have to highlight just how deep this is. Look at this issue with open eyes. Do not close yourself to what is going on, government. I am really sorry to say that the Premier has failed to address this. There has been a bandaid approach to try and look like the government is doing something. They have failed. That is exactly what the investigator Mr Watson said about what the government has failed to do. I am quoting from the Age article of 16 March ‘‘Nobody’s stopping it’: The taxpayer money trail from building sites to the underworld’. The very first line of this article says it all:

The Victorian government covered up rampant and ongoing CFMEU-linked organised crime infiltration and corruption on its multibillion dollar Big Build infrastructure scheme by failing to ensure scrutiny of “senior bureaucrats and ministerial offices” …

That is the investigator who was appointed by Mr Irving that was looking into this issue – that is, the Labor government’s activities. But this is somebody, the investigator, saying that about the failures of this government, of the Premier, and that raises the very simple question that Mr Limbrick alluded to when the Premier was asked in question time a few minutes ago: if there is so much wastage in these projects, how much taxpayer money has gone to these organised crime figures?

David Limbrick: We’ll never know.

Georgie CROZIER: Well, surely the government should be doing something about it, Mr Limbrick, to take up your interjection. We will never know, I think you are right, but when you have got tens of billions of dollars of overruns in projects and this has been siphoned and funnelled through. you have got to ask: how is this happening? We must stop this. This is taxpayers money being wasted and blown and siphoned through in a very seedy way. In fact it is more than seedy, it is so dark – it actually terrifies me what is happening in this state. But look at the issue around the violence against women, where this government say they stand up for women. Well, we all stand up for women. No-one wants this violence to occur. But it is occurring, and it is being reported. The women are coming out and speaking about it, saying that they are being locked in cupboards, that they have got these ice-fuelled addicts threatening them, intimidating them, and that sexual exploitation is going on, the standover tactics and then the bashings. We do not know the extent of those either.

This is not acceptable in any way. We have got to do more and we have got to do better. I am not surprised that the government is not supporting this, because the Liberals and the Nationals have been calling for a royal commission to get to the bottom of this. A government-initiated inquiry that does not have the broad terms of reference to look at this very dark and terrifying and very concerning corrupt culture is not the answer. We need openness and transparency. We need people to have the confidence to come forward and speak about their experiences so we understand what is going on. That is why the Liberals and Nationals consistently say we need a royal commission into this. The federal government abolished the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the building commission to oversee some of this. Since that abolishment occurred under Labor at a federal level this corruption has skyrocketed. We need to see: did that work, or did it not work?

The royal commission can look into all of those things, apart from all of the other things. While the government and others will not agree to a royal commission, what is happening in this state is an appalling chapter in this state’s history. It is so dark, it is so menacing and it is so concerning that there are people now that feel that they cannot speak out, that they have nowhere to go because of the standover tactics, because of the abuse, because of their job security. And they look and see what is happening: the corruption, the ghost shifts. They know that is not right. The ghost shifts – that is taxpayers money. That is their children’s futures being squandered by a government who has lost control and oversight of what they have a responsibility for, and that is to ensure that when you are charged with infrastructure projects they are overseen properly, that money from taxpayers is spent properly and is not abused and laundered through these criminal gangs, that these bikies that are infiltrating multiple unions now, by the sounds, are not taking that money out overseas. Bikie gangs, as we know, have got a very wide international web. It has lost control here. Then we have got –

David Limbrick interjected.

Georgie CROZIER: Multinational, yes, quite right. This is really hugely concerning, but what concerns me more is that we have got a Premier completely out of her depth. She does not know to deal with this. She has got CFMEU mates. Her husband was a CFMEU official. I am not criticising that, but she is close to these people; we understand that.

Ryan Batchelor: Different division. What’s that got to do with it?

Georgie CROZIER: I do not care. I am not criticising it. I am just saying –

Ryan Batchelor: Why are you raising it? You are casting aspersions on her.

Georgie CROZIER: This is the problem, because there are close relationships to –

Ryan Batchelor interjected.

Georgie CROZIER: I am telling Mr Batchelor and others there are relationships with government MPs and that is why Mr Watson said that the Victorian government covered up rampant and ongoing CFMEU-linked organised crime infiltration and corruption on its multibillion-dollar Big Build infrastructure scheme by failing to ensure scrutiny of senior bureaucrats and ministerial offices. There are close links in all of this, and I am not suggesting anyone has closer links than others. I am just saying there are links with this union, and this is the problem that the government will not address. We on this side will continue to stand up for every single Victorian, for every single union member who wants to clean this mess up too, and there are plenty of them that want this cleaned up so that they can get on and do their work.

David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (15:18): I rise to make a contribution on this motion from Mr Mulholland. I have been overwhelmed by where this discussion has gone in the last few speeches, to a sort of global organised crime conspiracy, but we will come back to that. As has been alluded to, it has been nine months since the opposition last brought a CFMEU motion into this chamber. In the words of Yogi Bear, I have this feeling of ‘Oh, no, it is deja vu again,’ because it is deja vu again; it is the same stuff that was dragged up in July of last year. I think we are going to cover much of the same ground, except we now have gone from a royal commission into the construction division of the CFMEU – although they just talk about the CFMEU, which is a much bigger entity, as Mr Batchelor alluded to – to now apparently a royal commission into global organised crime and everything in between.

First and foremost, let us just get to a certain thing that I think we all can agree on: there are deeply, deeply disturbing elements that are correctly identified in this motion that strike to corruption and that strike to violence against women. Both are intolerable. Both are crimes. Both can and should be prosecuted with the full force of the law however and wherever they occur.

I think we can all agree on that basic principle, and then probably we go in different directions.

Reading this motion one might get the sense that these crimes are happening in some sort of a legal process vacuum – that 60 Minutes and Nick McKenzie have shown this up, and I want to come back to the question of the investigative journalism, because it has been outstanding – but that is simply not the case. Currently we have, working on the construction division of the CFMEU – and I would also hope we can agree, apart from the criminal question, that we are talking about the construction division of the CFMEU, not the broader union –

Ryan Batchelor: How do you know the difference between the divisions?

David ETTERSHANK: We will come to that as well. Currently we have running Operation Hawk by Victoria Police, and we have Operation Rye by the Australian Federal Police. A lot of this is from my discussion last year. We have the implementation of the Wilson review, which made recommendations specifically on Victorian government sites and is, as I understand it, the subject of forthcoming legislation. We have a very vigorous administration of the Victorian construction division of the CFMEU, with multiple investigations running off that. We have the Fair Work Commission’s ongoing investigation into improper conduct, which is also leveraging off the administrator’s appointment. We have the ongoing Fair Work Ombudsman investigations, and there are multiples of those. Then there is also the very real possibility that there are federal and/or state anti-corruption commission investigations, but neither of those agencies is in the habit of making their investigations public until they so choose.

There is such a thing as too many cooks in the kitchen. The opposition is well aware of this. The call for a royal commission in this context is, I fear, frankly theatre. It is mischief, and it is quite possibly something a little more sinister. It is hard not to see that this is basically an opportunity to attack the construction division of the CFMEU, the broader CFMEU, the broader construction industry group of unions and the trade union movement as a whole. Just as outlaw bikie gangs and organised crime will follow the money, as Mr Limbrick quite accurately asserted, so too is the opposition inextricably drawn to its beloved union-busting agenda, like flies to excrement. What is that agenda?

Firstly, and we have heard it directly, it is to bring back the Australian Building and Construction Commission – the so-called tough cop on the beat. Their greatest achievement was to lower productivity. They did have a few weeks of some happiness, and some stats that keep on being bandied around, but overall during the period of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, productivity on construction work sites went down. Workplace deaths and injuries increased on their watch, and they used to stomp around threatening people with jail terms if they did not take down union flags. That was the glorious ABCC. And that was at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to the taxpayer.

Let us not pretend that this problem in the construction sector is new. A lot of this was absolutely happening on the watch of the ABCC, and what did they do about it? They went after Bill Shorten. Jeez, that was good, wasn’t it? The reality is that it is the likes of investigative reporters like Nick McKenzie and the other great journos who have worked in this area – not the ABCC and their army of so-called ‘investigators’ – that have brought this stuff into the light. Let us put that in some perspective. But you still long for the glory days when this army could be deployed under the banner of the ABCC to try and smash unions in the construction sector.

Secondly, in terms of the grand plan, there is clearly an intent to deregister unions – to kneecap their ability to organise and protect workers – and that is an action that is so dumb that it is up there with the Kennett government’s decision to hand over their industrial relations powers to save some money. We still have these Liberal wet dreams about reregulating industrial relations as though it has not already gone. You have already given it away, and it is not coming back. I hope you did save some money, because it is something you have lost absolutely now. That was just an extraordinary decision. If you deregister a union, all you do is convert it into an incorporated association, which is far less regulated and far less required to report and be transparent. Isn’t that just a remarkable achievement?

Thirdly, let us face it, at the end of the day there is still this dream of a golden age which was the WorkChoices IR law. That is where you want to go back to: to attack wages, to attack conditions and to attack the safety of all workers. That is what sits behind this sort of resolution, so we do not support this motion for a royal commission.

Let us just ponder for a second the history of royal commissions that have been deployed by conservative governments to attack the union movement. I think perhaps the most marvellous example would be the ship painters and dockers inquiry, where clearly there was a desire to smash the waterfront unions. What did we end up with? We ended up with bottom of the harbour. That was a really good inquiry, and in some ways it lends veracity to Mr Limbrick’s big picture that is, can I suggest respectfully, far, far, far bigger than anything that the opposition are talking about in their motion. But that is where it went. In terms of the actual waterfront unions, bugger-all – pardon my French – happened.

I want to try and end on a positive note. We have already discussed these crimes and the fact that these crimes should be dealt with by the people who are qualified to do that, and that is the police through an investigation. We also know that there are now a whole lot of agencies who are all having a particular role to play in this process. We have already discussed the huge, huge amount of change that is underway in the construction industry, but ultimately major cultural change is only possible in an industry – (Time expired)

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (15:28): I rise to contribute to the motion brought forward by Mr Mulholland and those opposite me. The motion begins by talking about how the Premier:

supported the strongest possible action to stamp out the rotten culture in the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union … and supported … Mark Irving KC as administrator;

The motion notes that:

Mr Irving appointed Mr Geoffrey Watson SC to probe into the wrongdoings in the construction sector;

Then it goes on to the most recent 60 Minutes investigation and the independent review of Victoria’s construction sector. It then talks about the response of senior bureaucrats and ministers and the government’s response. It touches upon the important matter that is the safety of women on Big Build work sites, something all of us in this chamber should support. Then it goes on to call for a royal commission.

The Allan Labor government will not be lectured by Mr Mulholland on improving diversity within the construction industry. The Allan Labor government is committed to improving diversity within the construction industry, and I am proud to talk about the work we are doing in this space to keep women safe and to promote their careers. The Building Equality Policy is designed to disrupt existing gender stereotypes and roles in the construction sector by creating training and employment opportunities for women. How does this work in practice? It means that through government procurement on building infrastructure, civil engineering and any other capital works we are encouraging women’s participation. That means encouraging women tradies, and it means that projects with a combined value of $20 million or more will benefit.

The Building Equality Policy addresses barriers that women face to gain a good, often union-based, job. It is meeting project-specific gender equality targets, engaging women as apprentices and trainees and implementing gender equality action plans.

The Allan Labor government is committed to increasing the targets and requirements, as our side of the chamber has done for the past 11 years, and that is what we will continue to do. We are committed to a more inclusive industry, a community where people feel safe, a community where everyone feels appreciated, a community where everyone is respected and a community where we value the work that is done and we pay fairly for it.

The Premier has had a strong record of fighting for women’s rights her entire career. Last year she introduced a wide range of reforms aimed at reducing family violence after listening to victim-survivors, and a package that announced the change in culture to build strong prevention responses. The Allan Labor government will never accept abuse against women. Our work in the building industry comes through long-term engagement with the industry, and yes, we talk to unions, the organisations that represent working men and women.

The government, as I am sure the chamber has recognised by our debate so far, will not be supporting this motion, because when Mr Mulholland was in his early primary school years, in grade 1 and 2, I was out there fighting for workers every day. Our government does not and will not, now or ever, tolerate corrupt, criminal or intimidatory behaviour in any workplace or any organisation, and our approach to dealing with these allegations has made it very, very clear. The government responded fast. It acted on the allegations of bad behaviour, including by the CFMEU, including commissioning the Wilson review to provide an independent assessment of how we can strengthen the government’s ability to respond to allegations of criminal and other unlawful conduct in the Victorian construction sector, and we referred them to the appropriate authorities like Victoria Police and other partners.

The context for this we all know – we saw it on the 60 Minutes documentary last year. It was unacceptable and it was not on. It led the Commonwealth Attorney-General on 23 August 2024 to place the CFMEU and all construction and general division branches into administration pursuant to new legislation, and it appointed Mark Irving KC as the administrator.

On 20 July 2024 the Premier established the Wilson review under the Inquiries Act 2014. The interim report was delivered to the Premier on 29 August 2024. It investigated how Victorian government bodies interacted with construction companies and unions, and the final report was delivered on 29 November last year, with the government releasing the final report and its response to the formal review on 18 December. On this date the Allan Labor government and the Premier accepted all the recommendations either in principle or in full.

These recommendations included establishing a central body to receive and refer complaints to appropriate agencies, establishing a joint alliance between the Victorian and Commonwealth law enforcement regulators and infrastructure delivery agencies to address systemic drivers of criminal and other unlawful conduct, amending the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2018 and the labour hire licensing regulations and incorporating clauses into construction policies and contracts that cover criminal and other unlawful conduct, with reporting requirements to the principal contractor. Re-evaluations and recommendations – (Time expired)

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (15:33): Thank you, everyone, for the contributions in this debate. We have had a few interesting contributions. I would like to thank my colleagues, particularly Ms Crozier for getting into the effects this has had on women on construction sites that we need to get to the bottom of.

I want to take issue with Ms Terpstra, who went on to say that we are just in it to besmirch unions. As I told the ABC yesterday, I know people in the CFMEU. I am friends with people in the CFMEU, and they tell me that there is nothing that gets them more pissed off and angry than when a bloke with a leather jacket and a bikie logo on it rocks up to the construction site. They hate it, but it happens regularly. Even despite the latest 60 Minutes episode, it is still happening. There are crooks who have been kicked off construction sites that are still earning $11,000 a week despite doing nothing.

There were great comments by Mr Limbrick, particularly about taxpayers that are paying the price, and Mr Ettershank went on to say that it is sort of a global conspiracy, linking it to the criminal underworld and the tobacco wars and everything else.

We see Nick McKenzie has actually made the link for us. Of course Joe Myles, who has commented in there, has been associated with a violent bikie and convicted criminal called Joel Leavitt, who was a Big Build health and safety representative. Influential CFMEU member and Rebels bikie Jahmahl Pearson was recently jailed for tobacco wars arson and previously worked on the Metro Tunnel, and Luke Collier is a criminal who previously pleaded guilty to assaulting a woman and who the CFMEU forced onto Big Build labour hire firms. So there is an actual connection, Mr Ettershank. I am not sure what you have been smoking there, but you are saying that it is an opportunity to attack the CFMEU, that we use every opportunity to attack the CFMEU and that no-one is saying they are terrible. Well, I lead you to the comments of Federal Court Justice John Snaden, who said the CFMEU is a ‘well-resourced, recidivist offender’ after three construction officials were fined over workplace breaches on a major freeway upgrade. He fined them a combined total of $108,000 after they admitted to contravening labour laws. They continuously end up in court.

It I did find it amusing, though, Mr Ettershank, that you seemed to know about Operation Hawk before the Premier did. The Premier established on Monday that Mr Ettershank knew about it prior to then. So well done for having more information about operational police investigations than the Premier, who lied to the Victorian people. Maybe with a new chief of staff in charge of the Premier’s private office she thought she could spin her way out of this 60 Minutes episode and thought she could spin her way out of a scandal. Ms Symes was obviously in on it as well. She said she had met with the Chief Commissioner of Police and established a new taskforce. ‘Met and was briefed’ sounds like you sat down at a table. It was a Teams meeting while you and Ms Symes were in the car on the way back from the North East Link, because they could not possibly have held a press conference there. This is just laughable. The Premier said she had established it, and the police were like, ‘No, it’s been going for about nine months.’

This is a laughable Premier. She has been responsible for the Big Build for the last 10 years. There is Westminster accountability. She is ultimately responsible for this – every woman that was abused on taxpayer-funded construction sites and bikies earning $11,000 a week for not turning up. No wonder we have about $4 billion of blowouts on the Metro Tunnel, where bikies and CFMEU bosses are just filing invoices and not even showing up. How many invoices have been put in for inclement weather – that might come out soon – on the Metro Tunnel underground? Ghost shifts – like, really? Mr Berger said the government will not tolerate this kind of stuff. Yet you not only tolerate it, you all aid and abet it.

Council divided on motion:

Ayes (15): Melina Bath, Gaelle Broad, Georgie Crozier, David Davis, Moira Deeming, Renee Heath, Ann-Marie Hermans, David Limbrick, Wendy Lovell, Trung Luu, Bev McArthur, Joe McCracken, Evan Mulholland, Rikkie-Lee Tyrrell, Richard Welch

Noes (22): Ryan Batchelor, John Berger, Lizzie Blandthorn, Katherine Copsey, Enver Erdogan, Jacinta Ermacora, David Ettershank, Michael Galea, Anasina Gray-Barberio, Shaun Leane, Sarah Mansfield, Tom McIntosh, Rachel Payne, Aiv Puglielli, Georgie Purcell, Harriet Shing, Ingrid Stitt, Jaclyn Symes, Lee Tarlamis, Sonja Terpstra, Gayle Tierney, Sheena Watt

Motion negatived.