Thursday, 14 August 2025

Bills

Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Steve Dimopoulos:

That this bill be now read a second time.

David HODGETT (Croydon) (10:25): Thanks to the Greens. I thought I would have to call a quorum on myself to get more people into the chamber to listen to the contribution, but now that we have had a division more people are in here. I have got a captive audience.

It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. We have been eagerly awaiting this bill to come onto the government business program so we could get stuck into the second-reading debate. Just to refresh people’s memories, it was introduced into the house on 1 April, second-read on 2 April and I think I wrote the bill report for the shadow cabinet’s consideration back on 17 ‍April, so it has been a few months. I had to dust off the notes and refresh my memory on the bill. Anyway, it is good to have it here because we on this side of the house are not opposing the bill. I will go through and talk a bit about our reasons for arriving at that position and make a number of points. I know my colleagues are keen to make contributions on this bill, so I will get through mine as quickly as possible and allow time for other speakers. Just again to refresh the memory, if we go back to the purpose of the bill, it is:

A Bill for an Act to amend the Wage Theft Act2020 to repeal the wage theft offences, rename the Wage Inspectorate Victoria, confer new functions and change the title of the Act, to consequently amend other Acts and for other purposes.

The main purposes of the bill as outlined in the bill are:

The purposes of this Act are –

(a) to amend the Wage Theft Act2020 –

(i) to repeal the wage theft offences and related provisions; and

(ii) to rename the Wage Inspectorate Victoria as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria; and

(iii) to confer new functions on the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria; and

(iv) to change the title of the Act; and

(v) to provide for any necessary transitional provisions; and

(b) to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

There are two main parts to the bill that I will come to, but to give some background and provide some context to this bill and our position I want to talk a little bit about the background of, firstly, the wage theft component of the bill and then, secondly, the Wilson review part of this bill.

In terms of background on wage theft, people may recall that the Victorian government’s Wage Theft Act 2020 was introduced in the Parliament on 18 March 2020 and commenced operation on 1 July 2021. This act criminalises the deliberate and dishonest withholding of employee entitlements. Additionally, the Wage Inspectorate Victoria was established to enforce those laws. Then the Albanese government introduced the Fair Work Legislation (Closing Loopholes) Act 2023, which passed in December 2023. Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 Commonwealth through the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 Commonwealth made it a criminal offence in Australia to intentionally underpay wages. The Commonwealth legislation, in practical terms, overtakes the Victorian wage theft scheme, and therefore the Victorian Labor government flagged some time ago that they intended to repeal the Victorian offences to avoid uncertainty for the community and businesses. And whilst it has taken quite some time to do that, the government did flag they were going to do that. It was no longer necessary. The Commonwealth changes overtook the Victorian wage theft scheme, hence the purpose of this bill.

In terms of the Wilson review, again by way of background, a series of media reports from July 2024 focused on allegations of criminal activity involving the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, better known as the CFMEU, including intimidation and coercion and anti-competitive behaviour on Victorian government construction project worksites. There was quite a great deal of commentary in the paper about this behaviour on Victorian government construction project sites, or alleged behaviour if you like. Then on 15 July 2024 the Premier announced that the Victorian government would establish an independent review to consider recommendations to strengthen the power of the Victorian government bodies who are engaged with or have oversight of construction companies and construction unions and to respond to allegations of criminal or other unlawful conduct in the Victorian construction sector. I think that announcement was welcomed and long overdue. We are keen to see movement in that area, particularly following those damning reports.

Then on 20 July 2024 the Premier established the review into Victorian government bodies’ engagement with construction companies and construction unions, otherwise known as the Wilson review. The Victorian Liberals and Nationals at the time – or still are – were critical of that Wilson review. We labelled it a farce and not a genuine effort to bring about effective reform that will crack down on the CFMEU, crack down on their misconduct and rein in the massive billion-dollar cost blowouts that all Victorians are paying the price for. The Victorian Liberal–Nationals proposed a royal commission to get to the bottom of the alleged rorts and criminal conduct that has flourished across Big Build sites under the Allan Labor government. We also announced that a future Liberal–Nationals government will restore integrity to major projects by establishing a new independent watchdog, construction enforcement Victoria, and that is an important point which I will come back to shortly.

Turning quickly to the main provisions of the bill, the bill will amend the Wage Theft Act 2020 to repeal Victoria’s wage theft offences and associated compliance and enforcement functions and powers, as well as rename the Wage Inspectorate Victoria to the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria to better reflect its role and functions going forward. The bill will give effect to the Victorian government’s decision to repeal Victoria’s wage theft offences following commencement of the Commonwealth offences in the Fair Work Act 2009, otherwise known as the Fair Work Act, on 1 ‍January 2025. The Commonwealth offences were drafted to cover the field of criminalising the underpayment of wages and other entitlements. The Commonwealth government introduced amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009, as I have stated, in the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024, which makes it a criminal offence in Australia to intentionally underpay wages. The Commonwealth wage theft laws commenced on 1 January 2025, and as a result the Victorian wage theft laws are largely inoperable and can be repealed.

The bill will implement recommendation 1 of the Wilson review to establish a complaints referral function within the independent statutory body, Workplace Inspectorate Victoria, to receive and refer complaints relating to public construction. This will establish a central agency to receive and refer complaints relating to Victorian government construction sites to the bodies who can assist.

If I can refer to the second-reading speech by the minister, the second-reading speech states:

In setting up the complaints referral function, the Bill also supports the implementation of Recommendation ‍7, by empowering the Workforce Inspectorate to receive reports from any person, which includes principal contractors. Where these matters are of a criminal nature, they will need to be handled in accordance with criminal procedure laws.

The Bill includes a definition of ‘public construction’ …

…

The Bill allows the Workforce Inspectorate to be re-named to better reflect its revised legislative mandate, as well as re-naming the principal Act. The Wage Inspectorate Victoria will be known as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and the Wage Theft Act 2020 will be re-named the Workforce Inspectorate Act 2025.

…

The Bill also makes consequential amendments to the Child Employment Act 2003, Long Service Leave Act ‍2018 and Owner Drivers and Forestry Contractors Act 2005 to reflect the new Act name and references to the Workforce Inspectorate.

They are pretty straightforward and sensible changes to do that. It goes on to say:

The legislative reforms also interact with the Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014 to support the referral of complaints and ensure appropriate privacy protections are in place for the referring entity. They also interact with the recently amended Criminal Organisations Control Act 2012 and regulations, which prohibit members of prescribed organisations from entering certain areas of Victorian Government worksites.

The bill briefing is always a valuable part of the process of scrutinising legislation, and we very much appreciated the bill briefing. I will come back to thanking those members from the minister’s office and from the department who assisted and answered a number of our questions. The way we go through a process of looking at bills is that obviously the bill goes out to my colleagues, the Liberal–Nationals, and we seek their input and comments, and there is a wide variety of expertise and experience amongst some of our people that look at these bills and have practical work experience. We also write to stakeholders of course and ask for any areas of concern to be raised so that we can put those in the bill briefing or have some discussion of them in terms of coming to our position of not opposing the bill.

If I can go through a couple of areas of concern, just to put them on record here in my contribution, the complaints referral function does not require the workforce inspectorate to investigate or resolve complaints directly but rather to act as a clearing house, ensuring that complaints are received and referred to the appropriate agency. The workforce inspectorate will be a central point of communication; it will not have powers to require referral matters to be followed up. In relation to the first part of that area, where I mentioned the complaints referral function does not require the workforce inspectorate to investigate or resolve complaints directly but rather to act as a clearing house, ensuring that complaints are received and referred to the appropriate agency, we indeed will watch how this actually works in practice. It is important. We place a high degree of importance on that, but we want to see how that will work in practice.

The next point I made was that the workforce inspectorate will be a central point of communication. It will not have the powers to require referred matters to be followed up, as this would interfere with the powers of other independent law enforcement agencies. We understand that argument, but currently it is not working. We constantly, I think on both sides of this house, hear story after story and example after example of people with experiences in the construction industry or dealing with some of the people and the alleged behaviour there. I know and respect the view that if there is unlawful activity or alleged unlawful activity, you refer it to the appropriate authorities, but if the current structure is not working, I would have thought it would be better that the workforce inspectorate would have the powers to actually to have those matters followed up, so they do not just refer them to the relevant agency, they actually play an active role in monitoring and ensuring that they pay up, because that is the important part. A lot of these things get reported or alleged, but then nothing really happens and those behaviours continue. In fact I have heard comments of union officials bragging, ‘Oh, look, don’t worry, this will wash over. It’ll be back to business as usual next week or next month.’ I think it plays a very important part in keeping the pressure on and stamping out this behaviour and showing that you are fair dinkum about stamping out this behaviour. It has got to be followed up, not just referred. We would have liked to have seen that, but given the legislation and given the components of this bill, we will have a look at how that works in practice and certainly look to improve or come back to that should we need to.

Just to continue on where I left off, as I said, the workforce inspectorate will be a central point of communication. It will not have powers to require referred matters to be followed up, as this would interfere with the powers of other independent law enforcement agencies. Nor is it given powers to take action itself in relation to a referred matter. That is back to my point: I think our view would be that they probably need to play a more active role without interfering or crossing over the independent law enforcement agencies but working in cooperation with them or collaboration with them to get results here. We acknowledge that, as recognised by Mr Greg Wilson in his review report, the responsibility for action belongs to the law enforcement or regulatory agency that has the relevant powers. The workforce inspectorate will have operational capacity to monitor the status and resolution of complaints over time – but I will come back to that point when we talk about the implementation of these changes.

The Wilson review made eight recommendations about how the powers of Victorian government bodies can be strengthened to better respond to allegations of criminal and other unlawful behaviour. This bill implements recommendation 1 of the Wilson review and supports the implementation of recommendation 7. I will add that when asked at the bill briefing why the bill is only dealing with recommendations 1 and 7 and why the bill did not include all the recommendations, we were advised that work is underway and further legislation will be brought before the Parliament this year. It would be easy for one to be critical of that – to encourage all the recommendations of the Wilson review to be brought forward and dealt with – but I respect the advice that was given at the bill briefing from the minister’s office and from the department that a second tranche of legislation will come and work will be done on that. Therefore our concern would be how long that will be. But given my initial comments that this legislation was introduced and second-read back in early April, having had a recent update from the minister’s office it is my understanding that this bill is in here now and that other piece of work has been done, and we would expect to see further legislation in the not-too-distant future. So we will reserve or strike out any criticism there, because as I said, we wanted the Wilson review recommendations to be dealt with sooner rather than later, but it looks like that is occurring just in the natural course of time. We look forward to seeing that further legislation dealing with the recommendations of the Wilson review and again going through the process of looking at that bill, looking at that legislation and the changes that it makes.

The second-reading speech states the Victorian government is committed to evaluating the effectiveness of the action taken to acquit the Wilson report’s recommendations and their impact on managing issues of criminal and unlawful conduct within Victorian government construction sites two years after the laws commence. The evaluation will also assess whether further reforms may be needed to make sure our construction industry meets the expectations of the Victorian people. I will make a couple of points there. We did raise a concern that the evaluation will be two years after the commencement of the laws. Two years is a long time, and given what has been alleged and given the stories we hear about alleged criminal activity and unlawful behaviour on Victorian government construction sites, we would perhaps have welcomed a shorter review time because we think there needs to be constant oversight. A lot can go on in two years. In terms of evaluating this legislation two years after the laws commence, we would have perhaps preferred to have seen constant or ongoing oversight and evaluation and changes made, should they be required. Two years is a long time for further things to happen. The evaluation is going to assess whether further reforms may be needed. Again, we would welcome working with the government on those further reforms, because I will go back to my point: we thought the Wilson review should go further. We thought a royal commission was the way to deal with this; that would have been our preference. So we will watch, monitor and wait but are keen to work with the government if further reforms may be needed to make sure our construction industry meets the expectations of the Victorian people.

The further point there is if you go out and talk to people, we all know what the expectations of the Victorian people are. They know what they want the government to do in terms of cleaning up the construction industry. They were all shocked and horrified by some of the stories and some of the scenes that we have seen in the media, both print media and on TV, and some of the findings of Nick McKenzie’s report into this. It was abhorrent behaviour and should not be tolerated. We know what the expectations of Victorian people are, and I think it is our responsibility to ensure that they are met. Again, as I say, two years is a long time given what has gone on in the industry. I guess constant, regular and ongoing looking at what changes this will bring and whether they are adequate and how all this works will be very keen to watch. The new complaints referral function will commence on a date to be proclaimed. No timeframe has been given as to when the new complaints referral function will commence. Obviously I make the point that the sooner, the better. We always like to see, when important legislation comes in, that timeframes and dates are put to it to give us confidence on a way forward.

I made some comments before on how we go through our scrutiny and analysis of bills when they are introduced in this place. It is a rigorous process, but we could not do it without consulting a number of stakeholders, including Liberal and National MPs and also stakeholders in the industry. We went to a wide range of stakeholders that that this bill would impact: Ai Group, the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Red Union Support Hub, DP World and the Franchise Council of Australia, to mention a few. No concerns were passed back about the bill, so that is always pleasing. If a bit of legislation comes through and those groups do not raise any concerns, that probably shows confidence in what the bill is and what it is to achieve. No areas of concern were raised or identified with the bill. That makes it a bit easier to get to the bill briefing and to go through a few things there.

I was starting to go back to my comments earlier. I did want to just put on record my and our collective thanks for those that assisted in our process of going through this bill: Rebecca Andrews from VICMIN, Samantha Towler from VICMIN, Lissa Zass from Industrial Relations Victoria and Naomi Snyder from IRV. Those four people gave of their time and answered our questions. In fact the member for Evelyn had a number of questions, having a bit of expertise in these areas, and put some questions to Rebecca and Samantha. We were most appreciative of the follow-up and information we got back, which again assists this whole process of us having a look and being able to not only satisfy our own questions and concerns about the bill but those that were raised by our colleagues. We can pass information back to them about that. I do appreciate the time from both the minister’s office and from IRV to assist us, looking at those and giving time to answer those questions, so thank you very much.

In summary, just to reprosecute our position on the bill, we are not opposing it. Wage theft is unacceptable. I think we all agree with that. At the time the government introduced the wage theft legislation, we had concerns about that. The then Shadow Attorney-General Edward O’Donohue thought that then was not the time to pass that bill. If you remember, it was around COVID-19 shutdowns, which were continuing to have a huge detrimental impact on the economy and business, so we questioned the timing. Given what has happened now with the Commonwealth changes, we accept that part of the bill. As I said, we are on record as saying that wage theft is unacceptable. Given the Commonwealth wage theft laws commenced on 1 January 2025, it makes sense for us to support this part of the bill repealing the wage theft offences.

In summary again, we have called for a royal commission into alleged criminal behaviour on state government Big Build sites, and we have been critical of the Wilson review. Nevertheless, we think it is important to support measures that will crack down on CFMEU misconduct and rein in the massive billion-dollar cost blowouts that all Victorians are paying the price for.

To summarise, even though we thought a royal commission would be better, the Wilson review has been undertaken. It has made eight recommendations. If we thought it could be done better furthermore, great, but I think we should support measures that do crack down on CFMEU misconduct and rein in those massive billion-dollar cost blowouts. Hence we arrived at our position to not oppose. We still think that only a royal commission, as proposed by the Victorian Liberal–Nats, will get to the bottom of the alleged rorts and criminal conduct that has flourished across Big Build sites under the Allan Labor government, but we are not opposing this legislation. We look forward to seeing how it works in practice.

I know many of my colleagues who wish to make contributions on specific elements of the bill have practical experience in wage theft and others have an infrastructure background or have had dealings on Big Build sites, and they will obviously use their time in making contributions to this bill to flesh out and highlight those parts of the bill. Other than that, I will conclude my contribution there and look forward to other members of this place making a contribution on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill ‍2025.

Steve McGHIE (Melton) (10:51): I rise to contribute on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025, and I am pleased that those opposite are not opposed to this bill. I reiterate what the member for Croydon said, and that was that we are all against wage theft. Unfortunately there are some employers that thrive on wage theft against employees, and it is a shame that that happens. I want to start by giving a shout-out to the mighty trade unions that represent their members on these issues. My history is that I was involved in some – I will call it – underpayment of wages issues with the ambulance service some years ago, and I will go to that a bit later in my contribution.

The main function of this bill will be to repeal Victoria’s wage theft offence and associated record-keeping offences in light of the Commonwealth introducing similar offences intended to cover the field, ultimately making our offences inoperative. As a result of that, the bill will also repeal the inspectorate’s related investigative functions. To better reflect this revised role, the Wage Inspectorate Victoria will be henceforth known as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria. This will in no way change the formal status of the inspectorate, and it will continue to be an independent statutory authority led by the commissioner.

Victoria was the first state in Australia to introduce criminal offences aimed at the deliberate and dishonest underpayment of wages. We were also the first state to introduce industrial manslaughter legislation, protecting workers and keeping their workplaces safer. It was also the only jurisdiction to establish an independent authority – the Wage Inspectorate Victoria – with strong investigative powers to enforce these laws. However, Victoria’s wage theft laws were rendered largely inoperable after the Commonwealth introduced its own criminal offences.

The member for Croydon went to the history of the bills, both the state bill and also the federal bill, which was moved and carried. The federal act will comprehensively regulate the enforcement of offences of wage and other entitlement underpayments. Although some of Victoria’s related record-keeping offences are not covered by the Commonwealth’s provisions, the Allan Labor government has chosen to repeal all of Victoria’s offences to eliminate uncertainty for workers, businesses and the broader community. By doing this, we have made it easier for all to understand and access these laws, so we have made it simpler.

Complaints will go to the inspectorate’s complaints referral function. The key objective of this bill is to implement recommendation 1 of the Wilson review, as we have just been informed by the member for Croydon, into the Victorian government’s engagement with construction companies and construction unions, and it does so by granting the workforce inspectorate a complaints referral function, which will enable it to receive and refer complaints from any person in relation to any public construction. This new service will be responsible for receiving complaints and tip-offs about any improper conduct of public construction projects, and it ensures those complaints are referred to the appropriate investigating entity. Those entities are already in place and do a great job. It will make it easier for those complaints to be made and provide a single doorway for people and complainants to raise their issues and for those issues to be actioned, with the particular focus on those complaints that involve a threat to safety, and in particular the safety of women in the workplace. We acknowledge that the Wilson review recommended creating a brand new body to handle and refer complaints. It might be questioned why we have not followed that to the letter, but the simple fact is it is much, much quicker and more efficient to give this function to existing regulators that already have the operational capacity, rather than building a whole new agency from the ground up. It is important that this approach aligns with the government’s recent economic growth statement, which commits to halving the number of business regulators in Victoria rather than creating more regulators. Embedding the complaints referral service within an existing agency is the fastest and the most effective way to establish the new service, and it draws on the skills and experience that already exist in those regulators.

Here in Victoria the Allan Labor government recognises that wage theft is a systemic problem right across the state and right across the country, which is why we took the first steps, before any other jurisdiction, to ensure that employers who stole money or withheld money and entitlements from their workers would face the full force of the law. We on this side of the house always back our hardworking Victorians, because all workers have a right to be backed and have representation to ensure that their hard-earned money is not being withheld or short-changed by their employers.

As I said earlier, in my previous role as the secretary of the ambulance union I was involved in a number of underpayment issues and in particular a big Federal Court case for paramedics across the state where they were not paid their appropriate leave loading when they took leave. This amounted to an outcome in the Federal Court where in excess of $8.5 million was paid to paramedics who were underpaid that leave loading in the past. That was a big outcome in the Federal Court. I cannot say that the ambulance service deliberately withheld it. I think they just did not understand or interpreted the enterprise agreement a bit differently to how we interpreted it and how the law interpreted it. I think you have those circumstances where sometimes an employer may not totally understand, or they may interpret a provision within an enterprise agreement or within an award quite differently to how a trade union might interpret it, and there may be a legal challenge based on that, with the view that there has been an underpayment of wages. Obviously if workers have the backing of a union, they can take those matters to the Fair Work Commission or to the Federal Court if it is a big enough issue. That is exactly what we did some years ago, and paramedics were paid the money that they were entitled to in regard to that leave loading, which was a great outcome for paramedics at the time.

We have these systemic problems right across many, many different workforces. As I said, some of it is deliberate and wages are deliberately withheld or underpaid, but in most cases most employers are pretty good. Some will make mistakes, there is no question about that, as we all make mistakes. The group that is most affected with underpayments is the younger generation. I think about one in three young Australians report wage theft. There are probably a lot more that do not report it because they are too afraid to report it, because most of them are casually employed. If they raise issues within the workplace, they do not receive the call to get the next shift, unfortunately, and it is really difficult to prosecute issues of underpayment when people are too scared to come forward.

I had a youth forum in Melton only a couple of years ago, and it was around young people’s entitlements and their rights within the workplace. There was one particular person there that expressed her story. After working through her issue, it appeared that she was only paid $4 an hour. She worked at a hairdressing salon, and she put up with this and was too scared to raise it. She eventually left that salon but did not prosecute that matter to receive that payment of wages. When we worked through all of her issues and what she expressed to us, only receiving $4 an hour seemed to be unbelievable. Unfortunately, she put up with that until she had the courage to leave that employer, but she never, ever challenged that employer. We see that a lot across a lot of industries where young people work. Most employers are pretty good, but of course you have got to keep an eye on that, and that is what the mighty trade unions do. I have only got a few seconds to go. This is an important bill of repeal, and I commend the bill to the house.

Bridget VALLENCE (Evelyn) (11:01): I rise to speak on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025, a bill that is really based on spin and falsehoods. Now, if you were to believe what has been peddled in the minister’s second-reading speech, you would think that we are debating this bill because of the Wilson review into the CFMEU’s corrupt behaviour on the government’s rotten Big Build and because the federal government has legislated wage theft laws recently. But nothing could be further from the truth. This is a classic example of how the chickens have well and truly come home to roost on the Allan Labor government’s unconstitutional wage theft laws and its negligent behaviour in turning a blind eye to the CFMEU’s culture of thuggery and abuse on Victorian government building sites for the past decade – under the watch of Labor.

I have to admit that in reading the minister’s second-reading speech on the bill, it was somewhat amusing, because it really just goes to show how disingenuous and deceitful the Labor government has become. The minister had the gall to suggest that the Wilson review had exposed a rotten culture in the construction sector. The Wilson review did nothing of the sort. It was the 60 Minutes program that months earlier had exposed corruption and thuggery in the CFMEU to millions of viewers. That is not to mention the fact that for the past 20 years courts all over this country have repeatedly condemned the CFMEU for its blatant offending. The CFMEU has been found to have contravened this country’s workplace laws on more than 1500 –

Mathew Hilakari: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, on relevance, this bill is about wage theft, not about any other matters that the member wishes to raise.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will not uphold the point of order. The lead speaker was given some latitude to go to this, so it is open for rebuttal as well.

Bridget VALLENCE: The CFMEU has been found to have contravened the country’s workplace laws on more than 1500 occasions and has been ordered to pay more than $24 million in penalties. So bad and so corrupt has the CFMEU become that the courts have labelled it a ‘recidivist offender’. To suggest that it was somehow uncovered by the Wilson review, as in the minister’s second-reading speech, is utter rubbish. The government says the bill is needed to implement the first recommendation of the Wilson review to establish a complaints referral function. Seriously, after the Premier herself has described the CFMEU’s conduct as demonstrating a deeply ‘rotten culture’, this government’s response is to implement a complaints referral function. Rather than setting up an independent body that will have proper investigative and enforcement powers to penalise unlawful conduct, like the Victorian Liberals and Nationals have proposed with our construction enforcement Victoria policy, all Labor wants to do is refer the complaints somewhere else. This pathetic response will do nothing to clean up the culture of corruption in the construction industry.

We have known on this side for years that the CFMEU has engaged in thuggish and abusive behaviour on Labor’s Big Build projects, and only last year the Federal Court imposed a $168,000 penalty on the CFMEU and an official for disrupting works on the West Gate Tunnel Project, which is now $6 billion over budget, three years late and still not finished. During the disruption the CFMEU officials intimidated and abused WorkSafe inspectors and Victoria Police members, including accusing them of being lapdogs of building contractors and being corrupt. These Victorian public servants were being abused by the CFMEU bosses for simply doing their job, and where was their employer? Where was this Labor government? Justice Snaden condemned the CFMEU officials for their conduct in this case, and found:

By holding up the performance of work, and by refusing to engage in a meaningful way with management –

the WorkSafe inspector –

… or the police as to their concerns, the conduct in which –

the CFMEU officials –

… indulged bespoke a thuggish assertion of control over how the site should operate.

He went on to say that:

… their response was to bully their interlocutors with unwarranted insults and abuse.

This Labor government did nothing to protect the WorkSafe inspector or Victoria Police members from this abuse and did nothing to hold the CFMEU to account. Instead, the Allan Labor government turned a blind eye to the culture of corruption and bullying and continued to accept millions of dollars in political donations and affiliation fees from the CFMEU bosses. This Labor government did nothing to stop the CFMEU’s rotten culture being embedded in the construction industry. Instead, Labor enabled it.

Gary Maas: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I have been listening intently and, on relevance, I have not once heard the member speak to the bill.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will not uphold the point of order. However, I will ask the member to proceed on the bill.

Bridget VALLENCE: I now turn to the part of the bill to repeal Victoria’s wage theft laws. It certainly makes for interesting reading when you think of the tortured history of these laws. The government first announced it was repealing these laws back in December 2023, yet it has taken a year and a half to finally do it. Let me make it absolutely clear, it is totally unacceptable for employers to underpay their employees. Employers who do the wrong thing should absolutely face the consequences. Not only is it unlawful to deny employees their minimum entitlements, but it results in an unlevel playing field for employers. Employers who underpay their staff gain an unfair advantage. It denies employees their income, and not only that, it denies their employees their rightful amount of superannuation. On any measure, denying employees their minimum entitlements is unacceptable, and I have assisted many of my local constituents with underpayment claims, including schoolteachers who have been underpaid and TAFE teachers who have been forced to work unpaid overtime.

However, the attempt by the state Labor government to introduce wage theft laws, which are now being repealed, has been a disaster, because back in March 2020 the then Attorney-General announced with fanfare that employers who underpaid their workers would face up to 10 years jail and would face the full force of the law. We know that through the COVID lockdowns they said that they were going to pass these wage theft laws and introduce criminal penalties. The former industrial relations minister referred to these as ‘nation leading’. But after all this fanfare – in November 2022 the first wage theft charges had been laid in Victoria – and the same story, the wage inspectorate commissioner announced in a media release that he had laid 47 charges against Rehmat and Mehar Proprietary Limited, which operated a restaurant known as the Macedon Lounge, and it was alleged that the company had underpaid employees a total of $7000. A director was also charged. In his media release the wage inspectorate commissioner said:

Victorians can be confident the Wage Inspectorate is doggedly investigating wage theft reports and intends to bring further appropriate matters before the court.

However, the employer responded by not only paying the outstanding wages back to employees but commencing proceedings in the High Court, arguing these nation-leading so-called wage theft laws were unconstitutional. Given this is the first case of its kind, you would think that the state Labor government would fight tooth and nail to defend its position after all that rhetoric. Well, you would be wrong, because the Labor government buckled and caved because it knew it had no constitutional leg to stand on.

It is a theme of this Labor government to introduce laws that are then found to be unconstitutional. In a backflip, the Labor government dropped all 94 charges against the employer and withdrew its very first and only wage theft case, demonstrating it was a failure and an embarrassment. After years of rhetoric about these supposedly nation-leading wage theft laws, they could not argue that they were constitutional. So what happened to the commissioner doggedly pursuing the cases of wage theft? What happened to employers facing the full force of the law? These laws are being repealed because there was an abject failure. Only one prosecution was commenced, and then it was withdrawn. Labor has not found one employer guilty of wage theft, zero penalties have been imposed and no-one has been sent to jail. The minister’s office told us in the bill briefing that 600 wage theft complaints were made, but what happened to them? We know through the bill briefing that actually the department refused to answer how many investigations have actually commenced. We will not be opposing this bill. The bill repeals wage theft laws that were completely unconstitutional and should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Eden FOSTER (Mulgrave) (11:11): I rise today to speak in favour of the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025, and I thank the Minister for Industrial Relations for introducing this bill to the house. This bill is a significant step forward in ensuring that complaints about unlawful or intimidatory conduct on Victorian government construction sites are handled efficiently and effectively. The bill will simplify the process of complaints to agencies, providing further access to all, including marginalised communities. It will protect the rights of all workers in ensuring that wage theft has no place in the Victorian construction industry. It will also in effect repeal Victoria’s wage theft laws in light of the commencement of the Commonwealth’s national law.

At this moment there are multiple state and federal entities with powers to respond to different issues that might arise on any worksites across our state. While this shows clearly that the federal government and the Allan Labor government are committed to protecting workers rights, this is inefficient and can make navigating this area more difficult for workers. One of the most commendable aspects of this bill is the establishment of a centralised complaints referral function. This central agency will serve as a single point of contact for individuals coming forward with critical information about unlawful or intimidatory conduct on worksites. By providing a one-doorway approach we will simplify the process for complainants, making it easier for them to report their concerns without the confusion of navigating multiple agencies. Millions of Victorians across our state can be assured that this centralisation will not only streamline the complaints process but also ensure that complaints are assessed and referred to the appropriate regulatory bodies promptly.

This bill in front of us today will rename the Wage Inspectorate Victoria to the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and the Wage Theft Act 2020 to the Workforce Inspectorate Act 2025. More than anything else, these changes reflect the expanded mandate of the inspectorate. Furthermore, they ensure that the name accurately represents its broader role without altering its formal status as an independent statutory authority. This bill also grants the workforce inspectorate the necessary legislative functions to manage the complaints referral process. This includes receiving information about suspected criminal or unlawful conduct and sharing it with the appropriate bodies. The ability to facilitate a two-way flow of information is crucial, as it allows the workforce inspectorate to follow up on complaints and matters it has referred to other agencies. This will ensure that complainants are kept informed of any responses or updates, fostering transparency and accountability. For the people in my electorate of Mulgrave this will mean a more reliable and efficient system for addressing their concerns about workplace conduct. Residents can trust that their complaints will be handled promptly and referred to the right authorities, ensuring swift action and resolution.

The Allan Labor government is committed to supporting, either in full or in principle, all recommendations of the Wilson review. This bill mandates that contracts for state projects include new requirements for principal contractors to report and manage criminal or unlawful conduct on Victorian government-funded worksites. Principal contractors are required to report any suspected criminal or unlawful conduct to the new complaints referral body. Failure to meet these reporting obligations could constitute a breach of contract, providing clearer grounds for enforcement if issues arise. I know that there are a lot of tradies, construction workers and contractors across our state who routinely do the right thing and hold themselves to the highest possible standards. Rest assured, this legislation will not make their work any more difficult. Instead, it aims to support and protect those who are committed to doing the right thing.

This bill also emphasises the importance of women’s safety in the construction sector. As many of us would know, construction is still a very male-dominated industry, with over four out of five payroll jobs currently held by men. The Allan Labor government is fully committed to driving long-term structural and cultural change across this industry. By implementing the Building Equitable Futures Strategy 2024–32 and the Building Equality Policy 2023, we aim to increase women’s workforce participation, break down barriers and challenge existing attitudes and norms. The complaints referral function will have a special focus on women’s safety, ensuring that their concerns are addressed promptly and effectively. I might add that we on this side like to support women. We women also like to support our fellow women.

On top of all these amendments, this government is also committed to evaluating the effectiveness of these measures two years after implementation. This evaluation will assess the impact of the bill on managing issues of criminal and unlawful conduct within Victorian government construction sites. It will also consider whether further reforms are needed to ensure that our construction industry meets the expectations of the Victorian people.

The provisions repealing wage theft laws will commence quickly, aligning with Commonwealth offences, while the new complaints referral function will start on a date to be proclaimed. This phased approach allows for the proper implementation of the new functions, including the recruitment and training of staff and the set-up of necessary ICT systems.

My district of Mulgrave is an incredibly diverse area, with people from all corners of the globe. They are united in one common thing: the belief that here in Australia they will be able to work hard, earn a good wage and support their families. It is where they come in search of a better and safer life. Unfortunately, at this time, wage theft disproportionately affects workers with migrant backgrounds. By implementing a simplification of the complaints process, the Allan Labor government is supporting these marginalised communities around Victoria, including in the electorate of Mulgrave.

With dozens of schools, the Mulgrave area is being seen as an opportunity for families to begin their journey. This will lead to the creation of new homes and further amenities. By committing to the protection of workers rights, families in expanding areas such as Mulgrave can know that their new community has been built through fair and supported work. Our household income is slightly lower than the state average, so every dollar lost to wage theft can have a significant impact.

This bill in front of us today is a commitment from the Allan government and from the Labor Party that we are the party for all workers and we want a fair go for everyone. This is the reason why I joined the Labor Party: to give a fair go to everyone, to be that voice for a fair go. We are determined to make continuous improvement to ensure that we remain responsive to emerging trends and challenges, making necessary adjustments to our laws and policies as required.

I know that many in my community of Mulgrave will benefit from these laws. They will be able to ensure that they get a good wage, that they get to support their families, that they get to put a roof over their head and pay their bills and that they get to do the thing that they aspire to, like every one of us, and we are protecting them.

To finish up, the bill in front of us today represents a significant advancement in our efforts to protect individuals on Victorian government construction sites from unlawful and intimidatory conduct. By establishing a centralised complaints referral function we simplify the process for complainants, ensure accountability and transparency and provide more efficient and effective systems for handling complaints. The focus on women’s safety and the protection of workers from culturally and linguistically diverse communities like mine, the new contractor reporting requirements and the commitment to continuous evaluation and improvement will further strengthen the bill’s impact. I commend the bill to the house.

Rachel WESTAWAY (Prahran) (11:20): I rise today to speak on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill ‍2025. While the opposition will not oppose this legislation, I must highlight the serious concerns this bill raises about this government’s relationship with the CFMEU and the inadequate response to construction industry corruption that continues to cost Victorian taxpayers billions. This bill perfectly demonstrates Labor’s priorities: protect their union mates and punish small business. The opposition supports repealing Victoria’s wage theft offences given the Commonwealth’s Fair Work legislation now covers this field nationally. It makes sense to avoid jurisdictional duplication when federal laws commenced on 1 January 2025, effectively making Victoria’s provisions inoperable. We also support measures that could genuinely crack down on the CFMEU’s misconduct and address the massive cost blowouts plaguing Victoria and its construction projects. However, this bill falls far short of what is needed to address the systematic problems exposed by the Wilson review.

Let us be clear about what we are dealing with. The Wilson review exposed criminal activity involving the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, including intimidation and coercion and anti-competitive behaviour on Victorian government construction project worksites. These are not minor workplace disputes. These are serious criminal allegations that have cost taxpayers billions in project overruns. Yet what is this government’s response? A complaints referral service that acts as a clearing house with no power – basically a toothless tiger with no power to take action and no power to require follow-ups on referrals. This is bureaucratic window-dressing designed to create the appearance of action whilst avoiding real accountability for the union that bankrolls Labor’s campaigns. The relationship between this Labor government and the CFMEU tells us everything we need to know about why this response is inadequate. The CFMEU has donated millions to state and federal campaigns for the Labor Party.

Gabrielle Williams: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I know these debates are often wideranging, but this one seems to have now gone on for a number of minutes on some quite tangential matters. I would respectfully ask that the speaker from the opposition could be brought back to the bill at hand.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member was debating matters that are in the lead speaker’s debate and also the second-reading speech, so there is no point of order.

Rachel WESTAWAY: The relationship between this Labor government and the CFMEU tells us everything we need to know about why this response as inadequate. The CFMEU has donated millions to state and federal campaigns. Multiple Labor MPs have appeared at the CFMEU events and relied on union support for their electoral success.

I am not opposed to the fundamental principles of unionism. My father was a union member and a person with English as his second language facing employment difficulties. They were enormously supportive. However, the power and corrupt behaviour of the CFMEU is unconscionable, and Victorians absolutely deserve better. When faced with the undeniable evidence of criminal conduct by their union mates, what does this government do? It creates a toothless tiger referral service while small businesses face potential criminal prosecution for honest award interpretation mistakes. They are protecting their political benefactors while punishing innocent employers. The CFMEU’s criminal conduct is not just about workplace relations but about the billions of taxpayer dollars wasted on inflated construction projects, and we just need to look at the evidence: the West Gate Tunnel, almost double, to $12 billion, and years behind schedule; the Metro Tunnel, $5 billion in cost blowouts and time extensions; and level crossing removal programs consistently over budget and behind schedule. Every time the CFMEU threatens industrial action, demands excessive manning or engages in the intimidation tactics the Wilson review documented, taxpayers pay through inflated costs and delayed infrastructure. Yet this bill does nothing to address these fundamental problems.

The opposition called for a royal commission to get to the bottom of the alleged criminal conduct flourishing across Big Build sites under this Labor government – we were right. The Wilson review, which Labor claimed would address these issues, has absolutely proved inadequate. Even this government admits it only implemented two of eight recommendations, with the rest promised for future legislation. A royal commission would have proper investigative powers, the ability to compel evidence and the independence necessary to expose the full extent of CFMEU corruption and Labor’s role in enabling it. Instead we get a complaints referral service that cannot even investigate the complaints it receives.

While this government protects its union mates, small businesses in my electorate face the collateral damage. Prahran hosts over 3000 small businesses, predominantly cafes, restaurants and retail outlets, employing thousands of Victorians. These businesses have never received government construction contracts, never dealt with the CFMEU and never engaged in industrial sabotage. Yet they operate under the threat of criminal prosecution for wage theft under Commonwealth laws, while facing new bureaucratic processes under the Victorian system. A small cafe owner in South Yarra struggling with 100 pages of the restaurant industry award could face criminal referral for miscalculating penalty rates, whilst the CFMEU official who the Wilson review found engaged in systematic criminal conduct faces no meaningful consequences.

This bill renames the Wage Inspectorate Victoria to Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and gives it responsibility for child employment, long service leave, owner-drivers, forestry contractors and now construction complaints. This is exactly the kind of regulatory mission that creates confusion and inefficiency. When one agency tries to be everything to everyone, from child actors to construction corruption, it regulates nothing effectively. The government talks about creating one doorway for complaints, but small businesses already face multiple regulators – the Fair Work ombudsman, WorkSafe Victoria, local councils and numerous others, adding another layer that does not solve coordination problems but creates more confusion.

If this government was serious about addressing construction industry corruption, it would implement the comprehensive reforms that the opposition has proposed. We announced that a future Liberal–National government will establish construction enforcement Victoria, an independent watchdog with real powers to investigate misconduct and ensure project accountability. Instead of this the complaints referral service cannot even investigate or take action. We need an independent body with the authority to investigate criminal allegations on government construction sites, impose financial penalties for project delays caused by unlawful conduct and exclude companies and unions from government contracts when criminal conduct is established.

We also need to provide transparent reporting on construction costs and delays. The government admits Commonwealth laws now criminalise wage theft across Australia. If federal frameworks are adequate for wage theft, why aren’t they adequate for addressing the CFMEU’s industrial sabotage and intimidation? The answer is simple: this government do not want real accountability for the union that funds their campaigns. Federal authorities have jurisdiction over industrial disputes and criminal conduct on construction sites. What is missing is not another referral pathway, it is political will to use existing powers against the CFMEU. Genuine worker protection requires holding corrupt unions accountable, not protecting them from consequences. When the CFMEU engages in intimidation and coercion, ordinary construction workers suffer. When their criminal conduct inflates project costs, taxpayers fund their misconduct. When they create workplace cultures of fear and violence, everyone loses – except the union officials.

This bill protects union power while creating bureaucracy that will primarily affect small businesses having nothing to do with the construction industry problems. The government promises to evaluate this legislation’s effectiveness in two years time. Given what we have seen in the construction industry, two years is far too long. Every month this government fails in its work to deliver things on time and on budget. We need to address the CFMEU accountability. At the moment taxpayers will lose millions through inflated project costs and delays. The opposition’s proposal for construction enforcement Victoria represents the kind of independent oversight we need. Unlike the government’s toothless referral service, construction enforcement Victoria would have real investigative powers, the ability to exclude bad actors from government contracts and the independence necessary to hold both companies and unions accountable.

Alison MARCHANT (Bellarine) (11:30): It is a pleasure to rise and talk on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. Here in Victoria we are proud to lead this nation on many reforms, but particularly in strengthening protections for workers and ensuring that fair balance between the rights of employees and the responsibilities of employers. For decades Labor governments, both federal and state, have driven reforms that send a really strong message that we are a government that values, respects and protects working people. From pioneering workplace safety laws, making superannuation compulsory, introducing family violence leave, establishing portable long service leave, holding labour hire firms to account, equal opportunity laws – and more recently I was involved in a committee looking at the gaps that we have in existing laws around workplace surveillance and employee privacy ‍– to the working-from-home legislation that we recently announced, we have consistently stood up for fairness, dignity and security in our workplaces.

I really look forward to hearing the government’s response to that inquiry into workplace surveillance. Throughout the inquiry we heard that privacy and surveillance laws have not kept pace with the technology that employers are now using, and we made some recommendations about how to make some reforms in that space, particularly for the introduction of workplace surveillance legislation that would on its own clearly state what is reasonable, necessary and proportionate when employers are watching or surveilling employees in their workplace or while they are undertaking work. It was unfortunate that we did not all agree in that committee, and we saw the other side write a minority report on behalf of employers. ‘Nothing to see here’ was kind of their argument, and I question if they really stand up for workers and working people.

Those reforms that I have listed, both at a federal level and a state level, which we have led, are not just pieces of paper and policies that we can all go and Google. They are actually protections that change and affect real working people. They have kept workers safe, they have ensured that they are being paid what they are owed and they recognise that a fair day’s work deserves a fair day’s pay. For context, in particular for this bill, four years ago, in July 2021, we made history here in Victoria. It was at that moment that we clearly stated and very loudly said that if you steal from your workers, you are committing a crime. It was not about catching those who had made a bookkeeping error, it was not about catching those who had made a misunderstanding, but for those committing the deliberate act of withholding or stealing wages, it was then a crime. Under the Wage Theft Act 2020, an employer who deliberately underpays wages or withholds super or cheats employees out of their entitlements faces the full force of the law – fines of up to $1 million for companies and individuals and 10 years behind bars. As I have indicated, that was not about punishing honest mistakes. It was about protecting people from deliberate exploitation and from those who knew exactly what they were doing – they thought they could get away with it, and they were targeting the most vulnerable workers, those who might have been too afraid to speak up or those who believed that no-one would listen to them.

In 2021 we also created the Wage Inspectorate Victoria, a watchdog given powers to investigate, prosecute and enforce not only these new wage theft laws but also the protection of young workers’ long service leave and fair contracting in key industries. Here in 2025, four years on, we can say that we not just talked about it but we actually put it into law and backed it up with that action. As indicated, we knew wage theft was not an accident, it was a systematic problem across our economy.

As has been identified today, now that the federal government has stepped into this space every state and territory has outlawed wage theft following the passage of the federal government’s Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Bill 2023. That is a major win for working people across our nation, and that has been led from this state here in Victoria.

The key reforms that will happen under this bill are the repeal of wage theft offences and then the renaming of the inspectorate. The bill repeals the wage theft offences and associated record-keeping offences in light of the Commonwealth introducing similar offences intended to cover the field, and as a consequence, the bill repeals the inspectorate-related investigation powers and functions. It renames the principal act and the inspectorate to better reflect a new, revised role. The Wage Inspectorate Victoria will be known as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and the Wage Theft Act will be renamed the Workforce Inspectorate Act 2025.

I just want to be clear, though, that even though I have outlined all that, this is not the end of our fight for fairness for our workers, and that inspectorate will continue to do vital work in the field. In contrast, I suppose, to what I am hearing from the other side, this inspectorate has over its time helped workers reclaim more than $1 million of unpaid long service leave entitlements, which is money back in the pockets of working families. It has benefited over 1400 workers and also provided education to businesses and further workers across this state. It was a simple message that we would stand up for working people, and we will continue that in this place. We will never stop fighting to make sure that workers get what they deserve and what they are owed in full, on time and every time.

As indicated, we have undertaken the Wilson review and that review did come with some recommendations. One of those recommendations is part of this bill today. Starting with recommendation 1, that a complaints referral body be set up to receive and refer complaints relating to Victorian government construction sites, this will be established within the workforce inspectorate. We know, and the Premier has clearly stated, that criminal and unlawful behaviour has no place anywhere and particularly in Victoria’s construction industry. We owe it to every honest worker and every law-abiding business to clean up that industry, and we are doing that.

But it is important to remember that the actions of a few do not define the many. There are many unions across this country that embody the very best of our values: they fight for fair pay; they fight for a safe workplace, job security and dignity at work; and they hold employers accountable when workers are underpaid, mistreated or put at risk. They give a voice to people who may be silenced. A good union does not just look after its members; it lifts the standards for the entire workforce. It negotiates in good faith, it acts with integrity and it understands a strong workplace is built on respect between workers and their representatives and employers. The truth is that many of the rights that we take for granted now – the weekend, sick leave and super – would not have been won without our good unions and our representatives. While we will take strong action to deal with corruption, intimidation and unlawful conduct when they do occur, we will also support the rights of workers to organise, to be represented and to be treated with respect.

This bill is a really important bill. This is now across our country. We have led from this state. This will create a single entry point with the powers to receive and refer complaints, a clear one-door entry point for workers to raise issues, and it will assess each matter directly with the most appropriate regulator. Our record has been clear. I have outlined that today. We do not just talk about looking after workers, we deliver on reforms and make them real. We led the nation on this issue of wage theft. We knew wage theft was not an accident but a deliberate act that was breaking the law, and we made it a crime. The Commonwealth are now leading in this space, and we have protections for workers across this country, which is an excellent thing. Victoria leads on many of these issues, and we are very proud to have this bill today.

Peter WALSH (Murray Plains) (11:40): I rise to speak on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. In listening to the contributions from those on the other side I wonder how much they have actually read the bill and what it does. There has been wideranging talk about protecting workers rights, which we all aspire to do. They have talked about wage theft. The Commonwealth government has now moved legislation to take over that role, and as we know, Commonwealth legislation when it comes to employment overrides state legislation. So this repealing of the act and renaming of the act was necessary because of what the Commonwealth has done there. Effectively it takes the Wage Inspectorate Victoria and turns it into the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria, and it responds to recommendation 1 and part of recommendation 7 out of the Wilson report, which was an inquiry into allegations of intimidation, coercion and anti-competitive behaviour on Victorian government construction worksites here in Victoria.

If you think about what the new body actually does, the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria is there to receive and refer complaints relating to public construction, and public construction is actually defined in the bill. In the second-reading speech the minister said:

In setting up the complaints referral function, the Bill also supports the implementation of Recommendation ‍7, by empowering the Workforce Inspectorate to receive reports from any person, which includes principal contractors. Where these matters are of a criminal nature, they will need to be handled in accordance with criminal procedure laws.

No-one has arguments with that, but the speech says:

The complaints referral function does not require the Workforce Inspectorate to investigate or resolve complaints directly –

so they will receive complaints; they are a clearing house, they will pass them on to someone else –

but rather, act as a clearing house, ensuring that complaints are received and referred to the appropriate agency. The Workforce Inspectorate will be a central point of communication.

Again, it is just handling the complaints and passing them on to someone to actually do something about them. It continues:

It will not have powers to require referred matters to be followed up …

So, yes, they will receive complaints, but they will refer them on to someone else and will have no powers to actually make sure that anything is done with those complaints that are put forward:

… as this would interfere with the powers of other independent law enforcement agencies …

So we have a government body that has been set up. It is going to receive complaints in public construction projects and pass them on to someone else, but it has no powers to make sure anything is done about those in the future. I question why we need this body if they are not actually going to make anything happen. To me, as I read this, the government knows they have to repeal the wage theft legislation because the Commonwealth has taken over those powers, and I think that is appropriate that they do that. But they have to be seen to be doing something with that legislation, so we have effectively got a bill that I think is about the government wanting to be seen to be doing something but not interfering with the cosy arrangement with the CFMEU on these industrial sites. We have got this body that will receive complaints, will refer them to someone else and will have no power to make sure anything is done about them other than actually have a report over time as to what happens. So why do we need it?

If I was a principal contractor, why would I go to this body with a complaint? Why wouldn’t I just go direct to the police, for argument’s sake, and make sure something is actually done about that? If you think about it, it has not been given any powers to take action itself in relation to matters referred, so what is it there for? The speech continues:

As recognised by Mr Greg Wilson in his review report, the responsibility for action belongs to the law enforcement or regulatory agency that has the relevant powers.

I agree 100 per cent. So I reiterate, we have got a body set up to receive information to send to someone else, but it has no power to follow up or make sure they actually do anything. It continues:

The Workforce Inspectorate will have operational capacity to monitor status and resolution of complaints over time.

So at some time in the distant future it will probably write a report. There will be a lot of people employed by this place and it will cost taxpayers a lot of money to write a report that says, ‘Yes, something happened’ or ‘No, something didn’t happen.’ That is what I thought the police and the other enforcement agencies were there for. They are there to actually do something. But we have got this body to effectively do stuff-all other than pass stuff on and then maybe write a report in the future.

I commend the imagination of whoever in government has actually set this body up, that they could actually dream it up to effectively do nothing, but the government can be seen to be doing something. Those on the other side can all stand up and make their speeches about what a great job the government is doing to protect wage theft, which the Commonwealth is now managing, and looking after workers rights, which again is a thing that we all support in this place. No-one should lose pay and particularly no-one should lose entitlements. I think the fact that some companies do not pay superannuation on time and those things is something that reflects on those companies as just being plain dishonest. People’s entitlements are entitlements and they should be paid, but this body is not going to do anything about that. It might write a report to give to someone else to do something about it, but it is actually not going to do anything about that over this particular time.

A number on our side have said that, if you think about this Labor government over the last 11 years, something like $50 billion of taxpayers money has now gone west in cost overruns on major government projects, particularly here in Melbourne. What is the cause of that? The cause of that is a number of things. One is most likely the way the government has actually set the contracts up. If costs overrun, it does not seem to matter. As the former Premier said, ‘Things cost what they cost.’ But I would imagine that if BHP or Rio Tinto or one of the major companies here in Australia had some major capital projects and they blew out by more than double or triple, heads would roll. CEOs or senior managers in those companies would be sacked because they have not actually had good contracts and they have not had good oversight over those projects.

In Victoria no-one has been made accountable for those cost overruns – as the former Premier said, ‘It costs what it costs. We’ll just borrow some more money to actually do these projects.’ There has not necessarily been good contract design. There has not been good oversight of the contractors doing that particular project, in my opinion. And there is a cosy arrangement between the head contractors and the CFMEU in Victoria, because it costs what it costs. If we pay higher than the industry average employment, we have better conditions than the industry average: ‘It doesn’t matter, Victorian taxpayers will pick up the bill.’ The government is not worried about this, because it costs what it costs; they are happy to just pass this through the system, and Victorian taxpayers pay the cost of this. As I have said in this place a number of times: $50 billion is a lot of noughts. Most people cannot comprehend what $50 billion would buy here in Victoria. I have talked about this before and I will say it again: we all know that the condition of the roads in Victoria is absolutely atrocious. There are 23,000 kilometres of highways and freeways here in Victoria controlled by VicRoads. If you put $1 million a kilometre into fixing those roads – and that would fix a hell of a lot of roads – that is only $23 billion. So less than half of the cost overruns would effectively fix every kilometre of VicRoads roads here in Victoria – but no, it has actually gone in cost overruns.

No-one sees anything better for a cost overrun. If a project was going to cost $10 billion, that is what it should cost. If it costs $20 billion and you still get the same project, no-one has got any extra benefit for that extra $10 billion – that could have done 10,000 kilometres of highway here in Victoria. That is how you put into context what these cost overruns actually mean to Victorians. It equally applies to upgrades to our schools or our hospitals. We have seen the failure from the government on the waiting list for surgery – a huge promise made, now a failure, because they have not met their targets. Some of that cost overrun put into the health system and partnered with the private health sector would have substantially reduced those waiting lists for emergency surgery. It is time the government was actually called out. While you have got this cosy little arrangement where it costs what it costs and it does not matter, it is actually Victorian taxpayers who are paying the price, as I have said, with the atrocious roads we have in Victoria. I heard the member for Malvern making his take-note contribution last night, including how once the condition of roads was a country issue while now it is a whole-of-Victoria issue because it equally applies in Melbourne and in the country. That is the cost we have got; this legislation does not solve any of those issues.

Dylan WIGHT (Tarneit) (11:50): I believe that I am standing up to make a contribution on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025, although listening to the previous contribution, you would hardly know it. The member for Murray Plains – and I wrote down his electorate this time – is a good guy. But, I tell you what, he is predictable. He sort of started the first 60 seconds somewhere in and around the piece of legislation that we are talking about. Then he just sledged the CFMEU for 5 minutes. Of course then we ended up on roads, and then somehow we ended up on birthing suites and elective surgery in hospitals. I mean, I would have taken a point of order, but I have said it before, it is better just to let them go and let them ramble on about nonsense for the 10 minutes that they are allotted. The member for Murray Plains started well in pointing out that there have been some changes to federal legislation that mean that wage theft is now handled through that federal legislation. I think he may have even said ‘As it should be’, but then he moved on and got upset that we no longer have any framework in Victoria to deal with wage theft or we are repealing the framework in Victoria to deal with wage theft. He went on to say for some reason that he does not think there should be a body in Victoria. Then he went on to complain that there is a body to deal with issues on government projects ‍– government construction sites. They are Victorian government construction sites; of course there should still be a body that can handle complaints and then refer them to the appropriate authorities to make the charges.

There have been significant changes in federal legislation. This Albanese Labor government has been incredibly good for Australian workers. I do not think that there is a member of Parliament or an Australian worker that could not say that. There have obviously been changes with wage theft legislation, but also the superannuation component that you were talking about, member for Murray Plains, has now been legislated into the national employment standards. Once upon a time, as a union organiser, unpaid superannuation was a big issue. It was a big issue, and it was an issue that was often silent or rarely noticed by workers, because a lot of workers just do not regularly check their superannuation statements. And it was incredibly hard for workers and for union officials alike – and the member for Narre Warren South, I am sure, has experienced this – to chase that up, because it was not covered under the NES. There was no right for a union official to be able to chase that; it had to be done through the ATO. And obviously you could not take those issues to the Fair Work Commission, which you now can. So this piece of legislation is in response to a whole suite of changes that have been made federally. But of course it is still appropriate to have a state body that can be referred issues on these government projects so then they can go to the appropriate authorities, whatever they may be.

The Victorian Labor government introduced wage theft legislation some time ago, and it was the first jurisdiction in Australia to do so. I remember sitting at the Labor state conference when then Premier Daniel Andrews made the announcement that Victoria would legislate wage theft to be a crime. This was after a pretty large campaign by what was then known as United Voice, which is obviously now the United Workers Union, in response to some egregious situations that had happened, particularly in the hospitality industry, but across some other industries as well. There were instances, a couple of which I will go through, where employers were systematically and on purpose stealing wages from their workers, underpaying them – just literally paying them under award. I think this was happening in some parts of the agricultural industry as well, member for Murray Plains, just paying under award rates, not paying overtime, having people work 50, 60 hours a week on an award rate and not paying overtime, not paying superannuation – obviously a big one that continues to be an issue today.

As a government we said ‘Enough is enough’ – you should be able to go to work as a Victorian and be assured that you are going to get paid what you are owed under either a modern award system or an enterprise agreement. If you are the employer that is systematically taking that right away, then there should be capacity for you to be charged. We saw the Macedon Lounge in 2022 where $7000 in wages, penalty rates and superannuation were not paid to employees. We saw the Din Tai Fung restaurants a couple of years after that. And we had the Made Establishment by our mate George Calombaris, who ultimately admitted to having stolen $7.8 million in wages across his enterprises over a prolonged period of time. That case was settled in a civil matter. After seeing what we saw for so long, we knew that it was time to do something.

We now have the Albanese Labor government, who have been, frankly, absolutely fantastic in the industrial relations space, picking this up and making it a federal framework. We have seen this example a fair bit, where fantastic legislation begins in Victoria under this government and then it ends up as federal policy. What we have got now, because of what we did as a Victorian government those five or six years ago, is every single worker in every single state is protected by wage theft laws. If you are an unscrupulous employer that is going to systematically, on purpose, steal wages from your employees, then there is the capacity for you to be charged, as there should be, because it is not right to steal workers’ wages, it is not right to steal their superannuation and to be able to get away with it and for there to be complex legal loopholes for you to work your way through to get away with it.

This Allan Labor government – this Labor government since 2014 – has been on the side of Victorian workers. This is one example of it – wage theft legislation which now has a federal framework. Industrial manslaughter is another example of it. I have never been unlucky enough to have a member of mine die on the job, but I know many union officials that have, and I have met families that have gone through this, which is why we have our industrial manslaughter laws – once again we were the first jurisdiction in Australia to do so. We are so incredibly important.

Obviously this year, only a couple of weeks ago, Premier Allan announced that we were going to legislate to protect the right of workers to work from home if they can do so, because we know in that case that workers while working from home can be more productive. It means that they can care for their families and have better lives. If you can do so, there is no reason why you should not be able to. I have seen stories that perhaps there was going to be a federal policy on working from home, until Peter Dutton came out and you-know-what the bed and we were just able to leave that alone, by the sound of it. This government, for the last 11 years, has been on the side of Victorian workers. That will not change for the next little bit in the lead-up to the 2026 election, and it will not change for the four years after that when we wipe the floor with those opposite.

I have just gone through wage theft and industrial manslaughter – both of them were opposed by those opposite. How you can in good conscience oppose industrial manslaughter legislation in particular has me absolutely baffled. How you can come in here, vote against that and then go home and go to sleep at night, I do not quite understand. The Allan Labor government, whether it be industrial manslaughter, wage theft laws or legislating the right to work from home, will always be on the side of Victorian workers, whilst those opposite will try and rip their rights away like they did with common-law rights in WorkCover. They will oppose at every single turn us trying to make the lives of Victorian workers better. This is an important bill, and I commend it to the house.

Chris CREWTHER (Mornington) (12:00): I rise to talk today about the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. At its heart this bill repeals Victoria’s criminal wage theft offences, renames the Wage Inspectorate Victoria as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and confers on that body a new complaints referral function, particularly in relation to public construction worksites. The coalition’s position is clear: wage theft is wrong. It robs workers of their lawful entitlements and undermines honest businesses.

In a federation the law must be coherent and avoid duplication. The Commonwealth’s wage theft offences, which came into force on 1 January this year, now cover the field. In that context, repealing Victoria’s overlapping criminal offences does indeed make sense. We will not oppose this bill for that reason. But we will not give the Allan Labor government a free pass, because while this bill contains some sensible housekeeping, it also represents another missed opportunity – another Labor half-measure on integrity in public construction and on tackling the culture of lawlessness, intimidation and waste that has flourished under this government’s watch.

The Commonwealth’s Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024, passed by the Albanese government in December last year, makes it a criminal offence to intentionally underpay wages anywhere in Australia. The laws, as I mentioned, commenced on 1 January 2025. These new national provisions were specifically drafted to occupy the field in relation to criminal underpayment. That means the Victorian offences in the Wage Theft Act 2020 have become redundant and in some respects inoperable. We opposed the original 2020 Victorian legislation, not because we condone underpayment but because this government rammed it through during the depths of the COVID-19 shutdowns, when businesses, particularly small businesses, were struggling to survive, and because the act created an inconsistent layer of criminalisation on top of existing federal provisions. Now that the national regime exists, the overlap is unnecessary. On this narrow point Labor has finally, albeit belatedly, done the right thing.

However, the most significant new element in this bill is not about wage theft at all; it is about the Wilson review. Last year the media blew the lid off what many of us on this side have been warning about for years: entrenched misconduct, criminal infiltration and brazen intimidation by the CFMEU on Victorian government worksites, as the member for Murray Plains talked about before. We saw credible allegations of union officials having links to organised crime, of threats and coercion used to control who could work on certain sites and of bid rigging and anti-competitive behaviour driving up costs for taxpayers. These were not just isolated incidents. In fact they were part of a pattern that had been allowed to fester under former Premier Daniel Andrews and now the current Premier.

The CFMEU is not some peripheral player in Victoria’s construction industry. They are embedded in Labor’s Big Build projects. They bankroll campaigns and they wield much influence inside the Labor Party itself. Indeed, it took the Commonwealth government, not the Premier, to finally place the CFMEU into administration last year – a damning indictment on this government. Faced with this public exposure, the Premier announced on 15 July 2024 that she would commission an independent review into Victorian government bodies’ engagement with construction companies and unions. Just five days later Greg Wilson was appointed to lead it. Now Mr Wilson has produced a report with eight recommendations aimed at strengthening oversight, tightening procurement, improving information sharing between agencies and ensuring allegations of unlawful conduct are dealt with promptly and effectively. These recommendations were not radical. They were practical steps to protect public money and public safety. Yet what has this Allan Labor government done? Out of those eight recommendations, this bill implements just one – recommendation 1, to establish a central complaints referral function within the newly named Workforce Inspectorate Victoria.

It also supports the implementation of recommendation 7, giving the inspectorate the ability to receive reports from any person, including principal contractors. And that is it – two out of eight. The rest? We are told they are being worked on and will be the subject of further legislation later this year. Victorians have heard this before. Promises of future reform under this government have had a habit of disappearing into the long grass. Meanwhile the same toxic culture Mr Wilson identified – the intimidation of contractors, the price gouging, the featherbedding, the billion-dollar blowouts – continues unchecked or largely unchecked on worksites across the state. This is not a whole-of-government response. This is not the decisive clean-up job Victorians were promised and would expect; it is the legislative equivalent of sweeping a scandal under the rug while hoping the public moves on.

Even the one recommendation Labor is implementing is being done in the most limited way possible. This new complaints function will not have investigative powers, it cannot compel agencies to act on referrals and it cannot force outcomes. It will be a clearing house, a postbox, passing complaints along to the same agencies that have already failed to get a grip on CFMEU lawlessness in the past. That is why the Liberals and Nationals have called and will continue to call for a royal commission into misconduct on state government construction projects, a body with full coercive powers, the ability to compel witnesses, the independence to follow the evidence wherever it leads and the transparency of public hearings. Because until that happens, the Wilson review will be just another Labor talking point, a political prop used to pretend action is being taken, while the rorts, the intimidation and the waste carry on business as usual on Big Build sites across Victoria.

On the topic of wage theft, I also want to mention modern slavery while I am at it. Wage theft of course is along the spectrum from good work at one end through to modern slavery at the other end, where people cannot walk free from that situation. While Labor appears or has given the impression that they want to tackle wage theft in Victoria, they do not seem to be taking sufficient action on modern slavery within supply chains, whether it is on renewable energy with solar panels, on train rolling stock or tram rolling stock, on electric buses and much more. I have continued to call upon this Labor government to voluntarily report under Australia’s Modern Slavery Act 2018, which they could actually do at any time, such as big businesses and others do in terms of reporting under this act.

When I chaired the federal parliamentary inquiry into modern slavery, our committee produced the landmark Hidden in Plain Sight report in 2017. That report led directly to the Modern Slavery Act ‍2018, introduced by the former federal coalition government. It did not just call for transparency, it called for teeth – an independent anti-slavery commissioner, penalties for noncompliance, a public repository of reports and coverage of government procurement. Government procurement at the federal level is of course covered now, but it does not cover constitutionally Victorian government procurement, which could be done, as I mentioned, through voluntary reporting.

That work taught me a simple truth: when exploitation exists in supply chains, whether in garment factories overseas or labour hire firms here in Victoria or elsewhere, good intentions are not enough. You need real enforcement, full transparency and a government prepared to hold itself to the same standard it demands of business. In fact in this very Parliament, as I mentioned, I have called on the Allan government many times to voluntarily report on modern slavery risks in its own procurement and supply chains, even though it is not required under the federal act. Public money must never fuel exploitation, and the state must lead by example. Labor’s approach to the Wilson review in comparison as well fails this basic test. Just as our modern slavery inquiry demanded robust supply chain accountability, the Wilson review calls for decisive action in construction procurement. Instead Labor has cherrypicked, watered down and delayed in this regard.

Let us be clear about what this bill does. It repeals the Victorian wage theft offences, it renames the Wage Inspectorate Victoria as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and it creates a central complaints referral function for matters related to public constructions, but it will not give the inspectorate investigative powers over these complaints, require agencies to act on referrals or address the remaining six Wilson review recommendations, which should be acted upon as soon as possible, nor will it establish the kind of independent, coercive inquiry that is clearly needed to clean up the sector and more. Labor says it will evaluate the impact of these changes two years after commencement. Given the scale of the misconduct and the billions at stake, that timeline is woefully inadequate.

Lastly, I note that the Liberals will not oppose this bill in the Legislative Assembly. We accept that repealing redundant state wage theft offences is sensible in light of the national law, and we support any measure, however modest, that improves complaints handling in public construction. That said, this is not enough, as I mentioned, and this Labor government must do more on this issue.

Josh BULL (Sunbury) (12:10): I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a contribution on this Thursday afternoon on the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. I was just tuning in and listening in to the previous speaker, and I am not quite sure where the position of those opposite is on this, whether the laws before the Parliament go too far or do not go far enough. I am just a little bit uncertain as to what the position is, but what I am certain about is that the member for Tarneit’s contribution articulated really well the government’s position when it comes to these matters, and that is that we remain committed to and focused on supporting workers each and every day. There is a very long list of things, which the member for Tarneit and others referenced in their contributions, that we have implemented, brought through the Parliament and brought through various budget processes, programs and initiatives that support workers within local communities right across the state.

What we know and understand is that the vast majority of employers work hard to support their employees and workers, but unfortunately, there are those that deliberately target those that work for them, whether it is through bullying, intimidation or, in this instance, a deliberate or wilful lack of financial support by taking away payments that they are entitled to. These need to be dealt with, and that is why the government brought in the wage theft bill previously. The changes that we have now seen, and these have been well canvassed, go to the changes from Canberra, and isn’t it good to have federal leadership when it comes to supporting workers? I know that the member for Mordialloc and a number of other members have spoken across various places within the Parliament about that leadership and the importance of being able to do that.

The bill that is before the house this early afternoon on a Thursday is making sure that both programs align in light of recognition of changes that have been brought in from Canberra. Whether it is wage theft, whether it is industrial manslaughter or whether it is the announcements that were made just last week by the Premier that go to supporting those that work from home two days a week, we remain committed to focusing on supporting workers and providing for the safeguards, the certainty and the security for workers to be able to be cared for within our state.

If I can just touch on the couple of days a week working from home, the consultation process has already started, but as we heard yesterday there has been an overwhelming response to that. To be able to move around local communities and my electorate, which is about 40 k’s from the CBD, to talk to families about what that means for them and the flexibility that it means, particularly with caring for families, is fundamentally important. Having the opportunity to be able to work from home means being able to manage on a week-to-week basis those various challenges that might be presented if, for example, you were forced to go in every single day, where you may be then travelling, in a community such as mine, 10, 12, 14 or 16 hours a week. To be able to make that change gives more flexibility and indeed I think recognises the importance of supporting particularly people in growing suburbs and growing communities that are, as I mentioned before, a significant distance from where the office might be. It is something that is recognised by the government and something that is very important to all of us on this side of the house. As I mentioned, the conversations that have been had so far have been very positive and people are very supportive of that, so I urge members over on the other side to have a think about their position on these matters.

But indeed, as I go back to earlier, the provisions that were contained within the original piece of legislation that came through on wage theft and indeed the changes that have now been reflected from Canberra go to supporting workers each and every day. The bill repeals Victoria’s wage theft offences and associated record-keeping offences in light of, as I mentioned, the Commonwealth introducing similar offences intended to cover the field and making our offences inoperative. As a consequence, and as other members have touched on this afternoon, the bill repeals the inspectorate’s related investigative functions and powers and renames the principal act and the inspectorate to better reflect its revised role. The Wage Inspectorate Victoria will be known as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria, and the Wage Theft Act 2020 is to be renamed the Workforce Inspectorate Act 2025. Other members have also touched on that. I mentioned some of the operations of various companies and entities, and as I think was reflected in other contributions from all sides of the house, we know that various companies and entities employ people who work not just in Victoria but right across the country and in all states and territories, and having a federal model that governs wage theft is indeed something that we warmly welcome, and we commend the federal government for the decision that has been made in this space. Making better reform and making a standardised process right across each state and territory is indeed not just good for Victorians but good for Australians, and that of course is a good thing and goes back to some of those challenges that go to different states and jurisdictions and the ability to have a uniform model and a uniform structure for these matters.

What we need to constantly do is make sure that these reviews and this work are done time and time again, and it is something that we remain committed to. Of course when working with federal ministers and the federal government on these challenges that are present in the community – ‘challenge’ might not be the right word, because the harm that is caused by wage theft and intimidation and some of the trauma that results from those who experience workplace bullying and harassment can be very significant and severe – not for a second should we wipe these matters away and say they do not happen or they are not common, because unfortunately they are. That is not to say that I think the vast majority of people do not want to do the right thing. They want to care for those who work for them, I am sure. I am certainly sure that most people endeavour to do that. But when these instances occur it is about taking the necessary steps to be able to address them and to be able to do so in a way that is structured and stands any legal test or challenge that might arise.

What we remain committed to doing is working with the federal government and with other states and territories through various processes that exist to be able to provide for the most up-to-date, robust and comprehensive set of reforms that can be in place, because in the end this boils down to supporting people as they go about their business and go about working for their families each and every day. When I take that back to people within my local community, who I have the opportunity and the great privilege to represent and talk to through a whole range of forums and places each and every day, what we want to make sure we are doing is supporting them to be their best, to be able to support their families and to be able to invest in all of the things that we speak about in this place and outside of this place each and every day – a strong, structured and dedicated system of education, a healthcare system that supports people so that when they get sick they have the health care they need within their local communities and of course transport that enables people to get home safer and sooner as we grow by about 100,000 to 150,000 people each and every year.

We remain committed to the provisions that are in the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. This bill takes the necessary steps to align with the feds to be able to ensure that when these matters do arise – and they do, as I mentioned earlier, arise all too often – those provisions are in place and are able to withstand the various challenges that may present themselves. This is why I commend the minister and the work that has been done by the office to bring this through the house and, of course, the union movement, which each and every day supports workers, as does this government. With those comments, I happily commend the bill to the house.

Jess WILSON (Kew) (12:20): Acting Speaker Farnham, it is terrific to see you in the chair here today on a bill that I am sure you will have much to say on yourself at some point. The Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025 repeals the Victorian wage theft scheme following the introduction of Commonwealth laws last year through the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 which were designed to cover that field, because as we know, the industrial relations powers sit firmly with the Commonwealth government, and seeing that the Commonwealth has now legislated around wage theft it is only right that we respect the constitution and the structure of the federation’s powers and hand that back to the Commonwealth.

The bill also implements two recommendations of the Wilson review. This was a review that was established following the incredibly damning reports of criminal activities associated with and involving the CFMEU on construction sites here in Victoria and particularly construction sites that were at taxpayer expense – Big Build sites, government construction sites. Of course the CFMEU is a union with very significant ties to the Victorian Labor Party. The bill before us today implements two recommendations from the Wilson review: recommendation 1, to establish a complaints referral function within the independent statutory body Workforce Inspectorate Victoria to receive and refer complaints relating to public construction; and recommendation 7, empowering the workforce inspectorate to receive reports from any person, which includes principal contractors, and then refer them to the appropriate agency.

We have been advised that further legislation will be brought before the Parliament this year to implement the remaining recommendations of the Wilson review. We are holding our breath on this side of the house, waiting for the government to bring forward legislation that will fully implement the Wilson review and looking forward to the government making sure that they are doing everything they can to ensure that they are outlawing criminal activity on construction sites, particularly when it comes to Big Build sites and government construction sites here in Victoria, because those bombshell reports that exposed the criminal activity, the violence, the misogyny and the bullying tactics on Victorian build sites shocked every Victorian when they were exposed last year, particularly because these are sites that Victorians are paying for and these are sites that we know are having cost blowouts and time blowouts every single day.

Geoffrey Watson conducted an interim report which found that bikies were still influential within the union and that the EBA negotiations had become vulnerable to corruption. He concluded that:

… the Victorian Branch has been infiltrated by OMCGs and by organised crime figures.

He said:

… the Victorian Branch has been caught up in a cycle of lawlessness, where violence was an accepted part of the culture, and threats of violence were a substitute for reasoned negotiations.

As was exposed at the time, we know that the Premier was sent detailed evidence in 2022 of construction union officials threatening violence on Big Build sites. But what did the Premier do? She took a year to reply and then only brushed off those concerns, suggesting it was a federal issue. The Premier has been caught time and time again turning a blind eye to union corruption on Big Build sites. The Premier was the former minister for major projects here in Victoria. Over the past decade she has been the key decision-maker when it comes to these major projects, the key decision-maker when it comes to the blowouts on these projects and on the deals on these projects. Yet the Premier, as per usual, failed to take any responsibility in terms of how the government plans to prevent union corruption, violence and misogyny continuing on government construction sites. In fact it is only because the CFMEU’s conduct was exposed by the media that the Allan government are actually taking any action on this issue, and that was the reason that they stood up the Wilson review. Despite vowing that the review would look into the rotten culture in the CFMEU, it has continued to be a major issue on construction sites in this state.

The Wilson review handed down eight recommendations to tackle union corruption, but it does not go far enough. As I said before, the legislation before us today implements just two of those recommendations. When vowing to stand up the Wilson review to tackle that rotten culture – we are still waiting for the Wilson review to be fully implemented. The Allan Labor government are not serious about tackling union corruption on government construction sites. Why? Because they are in bed with the union. They are more interested in protecting their mates in the union, making sure that they are doing deals on construction sites, than actually protecting Victorian taxpayers and the people working on those sites. The allegations that have been made of the behaviour on those sites are absolutely disgusting, yet the government has still failed to implement the full Wilson review. At the time we were very, very clear that the Wilson review did not go far enough. It did not have the power to look deeply into the alleged criminal behaviour on those state government construction sites.

Only a royal commission would shine a light on the dark, dark connection between the CFMEU’s behaviour and organised crime on Big Build sites. Taxpayers deserve to know how their funds are being spent and used on those sites. When you have a state that will have $194 billion worth of debt in the coming years, when the state government will be imposing on taxpayers an interest bill of $1.2 million an hour, Victorians deserve to know how this government is spending their money and how it is wasting their money on government construction sites to the tune of nearly $50 billion. The government has done a deal with the union movement and is more interested in protecting its relationship with the corrupt CFMEU than it is in protecting the interests of Victorians. That is the reality of the situation here. Those opposite can claim it is not, but why aren’t we standing here today implementing the full Wilson review? Why aren’t we standing here today ensuring that union corruption on government construction sites cannot be permitted in any way, shape or form?

This is largely a technical bill, a bill that removes wage theft legislation because the Commonwealth has taken it on. This is not any bright idea from the government in terms of actually improving how Victorian construction sites that are funded by the taxpayer will not have organised crime, criminal activity or union corruption rife on those sites. That is why the Liberals and Nationals called for a royal commission to stamp out this behaviour. We also wanted to restore integrity, and we brought legislation to this Parliament – the Government Construction Projects Integrity Bill 2024. This would have prevented bikies and known organised criminals from gaining employment on Victorian major construction projects. But what did this government do? It is a common theme: it voted it down. Once again, this is a government that is more interested in protecting its union mates than it is in actually protecting the interests of Victorians.

Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (12:30): What a great broadside to everyone in the union movement – just hundreds of thousands of working people described in that category. It shows exactly the true values of the Liberals when they generalise about the hundreds of thousands of people that are represented by unions in our state and help build our state and our community. I want to remind the member for Kew – because the member for Kew drew an association between the cost elements in projects and the cost elements in Victoria. Let us just go to a quote from a Liberal hero – not in this Parliament and frame – none other than the former Treasurer and Premier of New South Wales Dom Perrottet. He has been rolled out for fundraisers before by Liberal colleagues through here. I think Dom’s comments about cost escalations on projects are really interesting. This is what he said at the time he was leading that state and then going on to be Premier. With a building boom in new infrastructure on Australia’s east coast pitting states against each other, Premier Dominic Perrottet said it was okay if costs increased from estimations at the start of projects. Mr Perrottet said:

We are talking increases and that’s not unique to NSW – it’s happening right across the eastern seaboard … We have a duty to make sure we get our projects built that are value for taxpayers, but ultimately, we’ve got to keep going.

That is a very interesting point. Dom Perrottet was Premier and Treasurer at the time of these major projects – more tunnels than we have seen in Victoria were being built at that time. So with the categorisation of the Premier and former Premier Andrews, you make the same categorisation if you put forward the same contention around those costs and those projects, which is a direct reflection on Liberals who were serving that state for a decade, building projects that had cost escalations across the eastern seaboard. You cannot have it each way. You cannot say that cost escalations to drive project outcomes on behalf of communities are a good thing in New South Wales – remember, it is not like Dom Perrottet has been relegated to the never-never for the future, as this is a chap who gets rolled out at the member for Sandringham’s fundraisers left, right and centre as one of the great showpieces of awesomeness for the Liberal Party – and then say in Victoria that in building intergenerational projects that cost escalation is different to what was being experienced in New South Wales and that it is different to what Premier Crisafulli will experience leading up to the Olympics. It just does not stack up; it is not a serious contention. You cannot just have a swing at the government because it has got a red colour and say, ‘It’s all Labor.’ You cannot have a bet each way and say, ‘New South Wales, great. Victoria, not,’ just depending on the colour of the government and the project.

It is all on the back of this journey to this wage theft legislation and changes. It is really interesting, and I will get to some of the elements of the Wilson review in a minute. It is on the back of a storied journey, where we had labour hire protections brought in by an Andrews–Allan Labor government – an extensive reform that was chastised and opposed at the time. Wage theft – the world was going to fall in because God forbid people pay their workers what they are entitled to, not take their money, pay their super entitlements, look after them for the hard work that they put in and pay them a day’s pay, giving them the right conditions and outcomes. I was there in 2018 when the narration around this law and the opposition to it was extraordinary. We had those opposite at the time opposing this legislation and opposing industrial manslaughter legislation. That was so eloquently put forward by the member for Tarneit, absolutely calling that out. The wage theft legislation that then became the nation’s focus – and then, as the McKell Institute wrote only in 2023, a bipartisan position of the federal Parliament – originated in Victoria. It proudly started in Victoria. It is an extraordinary thing, though, that the bipartisan nature of that policy was not seen in this Parliament. We thought the fed Libs in their approach to industrial relations law were very conservative, yet those in the state Liberal scene were more at odds than federal counterparts like Peter Dutton, who was more on the side of making sure that workers were protected than the state Liberal caucus – an extraordinary thing.

So we have a situation here where we have got another iteration of federal legislation coming through that then matches the ambitions of the nation. The Albanese Labor government brought some of this legislation in, according to notes that were on my laptop, at the start of January 2025. We see a storied history now of the Andrews–Allan Labor government on the side of working people in Victoria – on their side on their wages and conditions and on making sure they come home safe each and every night, making sure it is a criminal offence if a life is lost and there is significant negligence in that space. That should just be humanity. That should just be the support that is provided to working people. And, guess what, we have got chapter 4 of this now. We have gone through industrial relations manslaughter reform. We have gone through labour hire reform and all the important protections that were brought in here and the outsourcing of that work. Now we go to wage theft, and the next journey, chapter 4, is the right to work from home, a substantial change right now. So we see the journey. We see the story. It will not be long before other jurisdictions see the benefit and merits in supporting the conditions and outcomes of working people and realising the mental load and challenges that they face already so much in our community. Maybe we will have a calling from those opposite to really join us on this bipartisan journey. Like the feds have finally seen, it was a Labor government creation out of Victoria that underpinned then the wage theft legislation that went nationally, and now we see this called out as a bipartisan position. It was not always there but is a bipartisan position now, and now we see the hallmarks of the next iteration of supporting people.

We know how important that is for gender representation in the workforce. Opposition to work from home, as I said yesterday in the grievance debate, disproportionately impacts women in the workforce ‍– disproportionately harms women getting back into the workforce or progressing their career or getting the superannuation they deserve by being able to have those flexible arrangements. If you are going to work each and every day and you have got to rock up as well – anyone who had to travel up the Monash this morning might think, ‘An hour and 50 in the car going up and down for people who are still trundling in for work that they might be able to do from home’ – it also disaggregates then some of that impact going forward. That is the next iteration in some of this legislation. It is good for everyone, and I just hope some of these changes we see as well.

The member for Kew made the allegation that the Premier has done nothing. Oh, sorry, there was the Wilson review – literally the same name as the member for Kew’s surname. The Wilson review, named by the Premier, was then put forward, and the actions of that are to come. I do not know what more action you can ask for with the review that happened, was worked through and went through. But I did notice some interesting things. It was not like we have seen in certain commentary – the comments and the narration by the member for Kew around all working people was extraordinary. All union people, the hundreds of thousands of people that are associated with the construction industry that are helping build our state and our community, many that live in my community who are working on, say, the Level Crossing Removal Project, built the Mordialloc Freeway, just about completed the Metro Tunnel – all construction people, apparently, were ‘looking after your mates’. What a term for working people. What a way to describe working people. It is a real warning to all Victorian workers of what the Liberals truly think of union jobs and of working people, and what they will do to their conditions and their outcomes. They will cut their conditions. They refer to them as ‘jobs for mates’. That means they are expendable. They are not in a target category of what their needs are and how we support them into the future. That is the language sneaking in from the member for Kew. It is quite clear when you say ‘jobs for mates’ of people in construction. Veterans in construction, First Nations people in construction, women working in construction, the hundreds of thousands of people in construction that help build our communities into the future – they are just jobs for mates. They are just jobs for mates in our states. That is all they are.

They are expendable to a Liberal–National agenda because they are not people they would target. In a government of Liberals, those people are expendable. That is the true warning. They say in superannuation and financial planning that past performance is not an indication of future outcome. I will tell you, in politics if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, guess what, it is a duck. And I will tell you why – labour reforms, wage theft, industrial relations manslaughter and now work from home. When you are in Victoria, the only political party that will support workers in our state is a Labor government. An Allan Labor government will always be on the side of working people in Victoria.

Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (12:40): I will try to be less theatrical than throwing laptops around like the member for Mordialloc. I mean, that is passion if I have ever seen it: throwing hardware around the chamber. I am more than happy to rise to contribute on the debate for the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. From the outset, let me be clear: wage theft is unacceptable. I do not think anyone argues with that. It does not matter whether it is a law firm in the Melbourne CBD, an orchard or a vineyard in Shepparton, a cafe in Mildura or government construction sites. If you deliberately and dishonestly withhold wages or entitlements – and I know the member for Murray Plains, listening to his contribution, made several references to withholding entitlements from a worker – then you are stealing from them, and that is wrong.

This bill repeals Victoria’s wage theft offences and transfers that responsibility fully to the Commonwealth. The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Act 2024 now makes intentional underpayment of wages a criminal offence nationally, right across Australia. Given that the Commonwealth laws came into force on 1 January this year, it is logical to do this in the Victorian scheme, which would now overlap and cause confusion for workers and for small businesses who have to navigate some of the most complex industrial relations laws in the world. This makes sense. It also renames the Wage Inspectorate Victoria as the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria and gives it a new role: a complaints referral function. I will come back to that later.

Right now in Mildura and across the Mallee I meet employers every single day who do the right thing. Just last week I was at a trucking company, GTS Freight Management, who employ around 300 people in several states and several locations. A lot of the logistics companies in Mildura, and there are some very large operators, have got staff – including truck drivers and those that have driven before and cannot anymore because of whatever it is, injury, family or different circumstances that lead to long-haul trucking not being an option anymore, and they progress into admin roles; it is a big, complex operation – that have been there for 20 or 30 years. These business operators are often operating on razor-thin margins, but they do everything they can to make coming to work every single day a joy, and that is demonstrated by these employees that have been there for, like I said, 20 or 30 years. But they are running on razor-thin margins, and they often get bogged down in bureaucracy, red tape and things like that. So we must ensure that we are distinguishing between a deliberate act of wage theft and an honest mistake in payroll – award interpretation or superannuation payment timing. That needs to be very, very clear. The distinction matters, because while we are cracking down, and we have to crack down on the crooks, we have also got to protect those honest small business operators from being crushed by that red tape and the fear of an innocent error becoming a criminal charge. That is why the Commonwealth’s approach, which consolidates these laws into a single national framework, will give some clarity and consistency for those employers.

We have heard many members on both sides talk about the Wilson review and CFMEU corruption on government worksites. This is another very important part of this bill, and it is one that stems from the Wilson review into misconduct in Victoria’s construction industry. Let us be blunt: the Wilson review was a farce. It was Labor’s attempt to look like they were acting on CFMEU misconduct while carefully avoiding anything that might actually change the culture on government worksites, to protect their mates. The allegations that we have seen against the CFMEU are not just bad optics, they are corrosive of public trust, and they contribute to those billion-dollar cost blowouts on the Big Build projects that we have seen, and they are cost blowouts that every single Victorian is now paying the price for. The Liberals and the Nationals called for a royal commission – an independent forensic investigation that could compel witnesses, demand documents and truly expose what has been going on. That is really the only mechanism with the teeth to get to the bottom of these rorts, but instead the Allan Labor government gave us this review, which has produced eight recommendations, some useful, but they are being drip-fed into legislation in bits and pieces. This bill only implements recommendations 1 and 7, and we are told the rest will come later. Well, given the scale of the misconduct, later just simply is not good enough.

Coming back to the complaints referral function, the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria will now be able to receive complaints about public construction and refer them to the relevant law enforcement or regulatory body. So that is a start, but that is it – it is just a start. The inspectorate will not have the power to investigate or compel action. It will effectively be a clearing house. There are no timelines and there is no transparency. We risk ending up with a new agency and a level of bureaucracy that is just a mailbox where complaints will go in but then who knows what will happen after that? Two years until the government even evaluates the effectiveness of this approach is far too long given that we already know what is happening.

When we get to regional Victoria, I want to make it clear: this is not just a Melbourne problem. In Mildura of course we have public construction projects, government contracts and workers whose rights must be protected. But if there are rorts, corruption or misconduct in the system, it hurts us all and every Victorian pays the price for that. It drives up the cost of projects – and we have seen that – and that means, like the member for Murray Plains said earlier in his contribution, that is less money available for upgrading schools and upgrading hospitals, which we know is desperately needed, particularly in the regions, where population growth has far exceeded any forecast and hospital upgrades have not been forthcoming. It was actually good to sit down with the Minister for Health yesterday and talk about population growth not just on the Victorian side in Mildura. We are a border community and there is population growth on the New South Wales side that we can clearly see, because often it is easier to subdivide and it is more attractive for developers to develop housing estates on the New South Wales side. They are coming over and using the Victorian healthcare system, Victorian schools et cetera, so that has to be taken into account as well. When you have these billion-dollar cost blowouts on government worksites, then of course there is less money for all of that and for the hospital upgrades that are desperately needed. So it was very productive to sit down with the Minister for Health yesterday and have a very candid conversation about that, and hopefully we will see some solutions forthcoming very, very soon.

In industries like the horticulture industry, often the media will jump on things to expose an industry that is underpaying staff. I know from growing up on the land and being married to a farmer now it is maybe one or two that have done the wrong thing – and it is absolutely the wrong thing – but for the most part our food producers and fibre producers are doing the right thing. They want to do the right thing because they need good staff and good workers to be able to get the food off the crops and onto tables in the city. Let us just be clear. Some of the stories that we have seen in the agriculture sector have been media beat-ups. I know. What a shock and surprise: a media beat-up about something that may or may not have happened – they took some footage under the cover of darkness . For the most part, our food and fibre producers do the right thing by their workers, and they will continue to do so because they are some of the hardest working people in this state, putting food on plates in the city.

Paul HAMER (Box Hill) (12:50): I also rise to talk about the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025. I will probably spend a lot of my contribution reflecting on some of the other contributions that have been made today. I was particularly interested when the member for Murray Plains raised the point that every worker deserves to receive what they are entitled to, which should just be a matter of fact. We should all be accepting that that is a statement of truth.

Unfortunately, though, this is not borne out by the actions of the opposition when these bills repeatedly come into the Parliament. When you think back, if the opposition are the champions of the workers, which they would like to have us believe from some of their contributions today, then the question is: why did they not vote for the Wage Theft Bill 2020 when it was presented to Parliament a few years ago? Equally: why did they not vote for the industrial manslaughter bills when they were introduced a few years ago? We could go on. There was a reflection this week that it is almost 100 years since Victoria was the first state to implement a five-day week rather than a six-day week. We saw in the Premier’s statement at the state conference recently the policy commitment to have an inbuilt right to work from home. How have we seen members of the opposition respond? As the member for Mordialloc pointed out yesterday in the grievance debate, we saw the shadow federal minister, the member for Goldstein, come out with some of his local cheerleaders and call it apartheid, so we know where the opposition really sits on these matters.

Cindy McLeish: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, on relevance, the member for Box Hill has moved quite a way from the bill, and I ask you to bring him back.

Paul HAMER: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, it has been a very wideranging debate. I am responding to matters that have been canvassed by previous speakers.

Members interjecting.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Wayne Farnham): Excuse me, can I address the member for Box Hill, please. The member for Box Hill is being relevant. It has been a wide debate.

Paul HAMER: I do want to touch on the Wage Theft Bill, and particularly the initial Wage Theft Bill that was introduced into this place several years ago. At that point in time, as we recall, the opposition opposed the introduction of the bill. They called it politics over policy and said it was not the right time. They agreed that workers should be paid appropriately, but fundamentally their problem at that time was it was not the right time and it was about politics, not the policy. This always becomes the problem. They are always looking for excuses to oppose legislation that provides further protections for workers. While I note that the opposition have came into the house today and said they will not be opposing this amendment bill dealing with some technical matters in light of the Commonwealth legislation that has been introduced, I think it is more symptomatic of the broader discussion and the broader issues whenever these matters arise and are before the house.

In terms of the actual bill, what is the bill actually doing? It is repealing the wage theft offences and relevant related provisions, it is renaming Wage Inspectorate Victoria as Workforce Inspectorate Victoria, and it is conferring new functions on the Workplace Inspectorate Victoria and a number of other smaller items.

As I said, the main reason for this legislation is really in recognition of the legislation that has been passed recently by the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate across the country wage theft laws and for the Fair Work Commission to have an important role in that process. I think that is a really important step. I am really pleased to see that the federal government – and again, only a federal Labor government would be doing this – is introducing federal legislation that covers all fields and covers all states.

I am actually really proud to be standing here repealing this part of the legislation, because it recognises that Victoria was actually the first state that went ahead of the pack and recognised that it was a really important issue – it was an important issue in the community, and it was an important issue for workers ‍– that everyone could get behind, and everyone recognised that this was not about politics, this was about making sure that indeed everyone was receiving their just entitlements. Obviously we have got to that stage now where Victoria again, being the first mover in this space, is able to lead the nation in workplace protections and worker protections, which have now been largely adopted by the Commonwealth so that they can cover all workers across the nation.

I know in my own community how important the wage theft laws are. I remember that really early on in my parliamentary journey, for want of a better word, there was a local case in one of our local restaurants where they were hiring students –

Members interjecting.

Paul HAMER: I think the Blues Brothers have just walked in. There was a local business, and it was hiring students. They were international students. Their first language was not English. There was a claim of $200,000 of underpayment of these two workers. The Migrant Workers Centre was doing a wonderful job of trying to expose this case and make sure that there was some fair compensation provided to the two students who were working at this establishment. I know they did seek some assistance and support from my office at the time, which I was more than happy to provide them because of the importance of, as I said, people getting their fair entitlements. This occurred in fact before any of the wage theft laws were in place, so we were working under the system of laws and the Fair Work Act that applied at the time. I always think back to that case and about how important it is to have those structures, such as the Wage Theft Act 2020 that we have had for several years, and how the new Commonwealth legislation will be in cases such as this, making sure that all workers, whether they have been here for their entire lives or they are just studying as students, get what they deserve. On that, I will commend the bill to the house.

Sitting suspended 1:00 pm until 2:02 pm.

Business interrupted under standing orders.

The SPEAKER: I acknowledge in the gallery the Consul-General of Pakistan Wajid Hassan Hashmi. I would also like to acknowledge the mayor of the City of Merri-bek Cr Helen Davidson.