Thursday, 13 November 2025

 Bridget VALLENCE (Evelyn) (16:56): I rise to speak on the Labor Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. The government will try to spruik that this bill has the objective of stamping out corruption in the construction industry and protecting workers, but unless it is seriously amended it will fail to do so. The minister in his second-reading speech said that the bill had been introduced to implement recommendations made by Mr Greg Wilson as a result of his review into the Victorian government body’s engagement with construction companies and construction unions. The review exposed what most of us have known for a very long time: there is a rotten culture in the construction sector.

Regrettably but not surprisingly, this bill does not take the strong action required to eradicate the rotten culture that this Labor government has not only enabled but allowed to flourish in Victoria’s construction industry. For over a decade this tired Labor government has continually turned a blind eye to the culture of thuggery and intimidation that the militant CFMEU engaged in on construction sites across Victoria, especially on the government’s rotten Big Build. Instead this bill makes very minor changes directed at the construction industry in Victoria and does not even fully implement the recommendations that Mr Wilson made in his report to the Labor government. Rather, this bill seeks to make a number of amendments to the labour hire regime that formed no part of the Wilson review, and it has not been subject to any proper consultation with relevant stakeholders or the general public. To put it quite bluntly, this bill will do nothing to restore integrity and decency in Victoria’s construction industry. Instead it appears to do no more than impose regulatory burdens on the labour hire industry and make amendments that have nothing to do with the construction industry.

Given the minister says that this bill seeks to implement recommendations 3 to 6 of the review, I think it would be valuable for the house to understand the history of how the Wilson review came about. The minister in his speech noted that the Wilson review had highlighted a rotten culture in the construction sector, but regrettably the minister was being completely disingenuous, because the Wilson review did not highlight that at all. As Mr Wilson himself noted, it was the 60 Minutes program and the Age which exposed the systemic culture of corruption and violence in the Victorian construction industry caused by the militant CFMEU. In response to the public outcry and embarrassment that these allegations of criminal behaviour on Victoria’s government construction sites – embarrassment that was being caused to the Allan Labor government – the Premier announced that she would establish an independent review in order to, using the Premier’s own words, tear ‘this rotten culture out by its roots’.

The review was established in July 2024 and became known as the Wilson review. It is to this Labor government’s eternal shame that it did nothing to stop thuggery and corruption on Victoria’s construction sites until ‘Building bad’ was aired by 60 Minutes. Mr Wilson himself found:

… it appears the bulk of the issues raised relate to large transport projects funded by the Victorian Government.

Who was the transport infrastructure minister during this time? That is right: for five years before she became Premier, the Premier herself was the transport infrastructure minister, and it was during this time that the seeds of corruption, thuggery and abuse took root in what has become the rotten Big Build. That all happened on the Premier’s watch, yet she did nothing to protect taxpayers money from being rorted and she did nothing to stop the CFMEU’s intimidation and abuse thriving on government construction projects.

Even before this we knew that the Premier herself knew about the corruption and thuggery that was occurring on construction sites as far back as 2016, a decade ago. Victoria Police told the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption that it knew outlaw motorcycle gangs were engaging in illegal activities on Victorian construction sites and were doing so in concert with the CFMEU. The then employment minister – guess what, now the Premier – said in response to Victoria Police’s concerns back in 2016 that she took them seriously. She said she took seriously the views expressed by Victoria Police and she would take on board their issues. But the Premier then went on to do nothing. As employment minister, then transport infrastructure minister and then Premier, she continued to do nothing. For 10 years the Premier allowed these illegal activities to flourish and for thuggery and intimidation to become entrenched on Victoria’s construction sites.

For over 20 years the courts all over this country have repeatedly condemned the CFMEU for its blatant and recidivist offending. The CFMEU has been found to have committed more than 1500 contraventions of Australia’s workplace laws and ordered to pay over $24 million in penalties, yet the Allan Labor government continued to do nothing. In his report, Mr Wilson quoted the findings of Mr Geoffrey Watson SC, who found:

… violence was an accepted part of the culture within the union … He also found –

which is relevant to this bill –

that organised crime figures and outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMCG) have infiltrated the CFMEU and placed themselves and colleagues in delegate positions through employment with third parties, often through labour hire agencies, with the aim of being “placed in positions of commercial, as well as industrial, power.”

On 29 November 2024, Mr Wilson submitted his final report to the government, which included the recommendations that now form part of the bill before us. Again, it is outrageous that after the Premier said she was committed to tearing the culture out by its roots it has taken a year for the Premier to act on these recommendations and put this bill before the Parliament.

In his report, Mr Wilson found the labour hire industry had been identified as opening a path for corruption. It was identified that members of outlaw motorcycle gangs or former members of the CFMEU who had been removed from positions on government projects had found their way back onsite, onto government projects, through labour hire providers. They found their way back onto Labor government project sites as labourers through labour hire providers. Given the construction industry is the third-largest user of labour hire workers, it was clearly a target for corruption and abuse. While some of the measures in the bill seek to improve the integrity of the industry, they are completely inadequate.

Recommendation 3 of the Wilson review recommended the fit and proper person test, which applies to persons who want to become labour hire providers, and that it be broadened to include additional matters that the labour hire authority was required to take into account when considering licence applications. The review recommended that matters such as previous convictions or findings of guilt for indictable offences should be considered as well as whether the person had been an officer of a company in the previous five years that had become insolvent or had a previous labour hire licence cancelled. In addition, Wilson also recommended the fit and proper person test should include whether the person had close associates who would not be considered fit and proper. As the minister said in his speech, the actual amendments go much further than what Wilson recommended. Whilst we agree in principle with some of the amendments, we do think there are problems with this bill that need to be fixed. The first problem relates to the insertion of the new ground that states:

whether the person is under the control of, or substantially influenced by, another person whom the Authority considers is not a fit and proper person …

This amendment is inconsistent with Wilson’s recommendations. Rather, Mr Wilson recommended that the phrase ‘close associate’ be inserted, which is the same phrase used in the Social Services Regulation Act 2021. A close associate would be defined to include family members such as a spouse, a partner, parent, child or sibling. However, the government has ignored Mr Wilson’s advice and opted to include a much harder threshold, namely:

… the person is under the control of, or substantially influenced by, another person …

When we asked the minister’s office during the bill briefing how the authority could prove if someone had control or influence over someone else, their response was totally inadequate. Rather than including the simpler definition of ‘close associate’, which is already used in other acts and was recommended by Mr Wilson, the government has opted to include a new attribute that appears to be incredibly difficult to prove. This appears to be a clear case of the government ignoring its own independent advice and opting to include a clause that seems impossible for the Labour Hire Authority to prove. It seems to be making the authority’s job harder, not easier, in terms of weeding out disreputable and corrupt people from the industry.

The second strange amendment to the fit and proper test is whether a person is a member of a criminal organisation, such as an outlaw motorcycle gang. Under the bill the Labour Hire Authority will now be required to have regard to whether the person is a member of a criminal organisation in assessing whether they are a fit and proper person to hold a labour hire licence. I struggle to comprehend how on earth a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang could even be allowed to apply for a labour hire licence. Last year this Parliament passed legislation that banned members of criminal organisations from entering government construction sites. When the former Attorney-General was spruiking these laws, she said:

Organised crime and thuggish behaviour has no place in Victoria – we’re making that clear with some of the toughest laws in the country.

If organised crime and thuggish behaviour have no place in Victoria, then why under this bill is this Labor government continuing to allow outlaw motorcycle gang members to apply to become labour hire providers? If a person is a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang, then surely this attribute should automatically disqualify them from applying for a licence. In fact Mr Wilson made this very point in his review where he stated:

If it is illegal for a person to enter a prescribed Victorian Government worksite, then there is an argument that that person should not be able to hold a licence to provide labour hire services.

Seriously, what was the government thinking? Is the Premier prepared to come into this chamber right now and say she is happy for an outlaw motorcycle gang member to be allowed to apply to be given a labour hire licence under this bill? Because that is exactly what this bill allows for.

Earlier I referred to Mr Watson’s findings, in which he said that labour hire firms had been used as a vehicle for organised crime to infiltrate the construction industry. Yet this government again has completely ignored these findings. This is just incredible stupidity, it is hypocrisy, it is inconsistency from this tired Labor government. On one hand this government is saying we do not want motorcycle gang members on Victorian construction sites, but on the other hand it is saying it is okay for them to apply for and run labour hire companies that will provide workers to the very same sites. Seriously, you could not make this incompetence up. This government has completely lost the plot, and the bill absolutely must be amended to automatically disqualify criminal organisation and outlaw motorcycle gang members from holding labour hire licences – as simple as that.

Unless this bill is amended, the Labor government will continue to allow outlaw motorcycle gangs and other criminal organisations to obtain licences to operate labour hire businesses on Victorian construction sites, and as a consequence the scourge of corruption and intimidation will continue to plague Victoria’s construction industry. It is an absolute debacle.

Now to recommendation 4 of the review, where Mr Wilson recommended that the labour hire regulations should be amended to define certain activities as coming within the construction industry to provide greater certainty to the industry in relation to work that comes within the jurisdiction of the labour hire regulatory framework. Mr Wilson noted a similar approach had been taken in relation to other industries, such as commercial cleaning and horticulture. Yet the government has completely ignored this recommendation and decided to do something completely different. Instead of doing what was recommended by Wilson, the government has decided to change the definition of ‘labour hire services’ under the act. This new definition will not just apply to the construction industry, it will apply to every single industry that uses labour hire in Victoria. This is a massive change to the labour hire scheme and does not in any way bear any resemblance to what Mr Wilson recommended in his report. Yet this government has sought to disguise this change as having its genesis from the Wilson review. Nothing could be further from the truth.

This new definition will have much broader reach and potentially capture many different types of commercial arrangements that previously did not come within the jurisdiction of this scheme. There has been no consultation with stakeholders about this new definition or how far its new scope will extend. The new definition seeks to extend the labour hire scheme to businesses that have the character of the supply of labour. What is meant by ‘having the character of the supply of labour’ is left completely ambiguous in this bill. Quite unhelpfully, this bill says that the character will depend on the ‘terms of the arrangement’ entered into and the ‘totality of the relationship’. These new provisions are utterly useless and will create further uncertainty and confusion. They are completely open to subjective interpretation and inconsistency.

The government has completely ignored what Wilson recommended, and instead the minister, even in his speech, said that he sought to capture arrangements involving supply chains and intermediary businesses in any industry. When we asked the minister’s office in the bill briefing how many businesses would be captured by this new definition, we received stunned silence. The minister’s office could not even tell us how many new businesses were likely to be impacted by this change and come under the Labour Hire Authority’s jurisdiction. No modelling had been undertaken about the impacts of the change. Instead the minister’s office told us they wanted the amendments to be as broad as possible and did not believe they would have any material impact. What an extraordinary response. How can anyone say significant legislative changes such as the ones that we are debating today will have no material impact if they have not done any modelling or analysis? Clearly the government does not care that there will be a surge in businesses that will come under the jurisdiction of the Labour Hire Authority which have received no prior warning about these changes and will face significant compliance costs as a result.

This new definition also casts doubt on the genuine subcontracting arrangements that exist through the construction industry. As everyone in this chamber would know, the construction industry relies heavily on subcontracting in order for specialised work to be performed by skilled labourers. In the minister’s speech he said the amended definition was not intended to cover genuine subcontracting arrangements, but the bill is absolutely silent on this issue. Nowhere in the bill is there a specific carve-out or protection for genuine subcontracting arrangements from being covered by the changes introduced in this bill. This is either laziness or incompetence, but to be honest, I think it is actually both.

When we asked the minister’s office why there were no express protections for subcontracting arrangements in the bill, we were told that they did not think it was necessary. How can it not be necessary? The government is making significant changes to the definition of ‘labour hire services’, which by their own admission is intended to cover many new types of labour supply arrangements. And they do not think that there could be a risk that genuine subcontracting arrangements could be impacted? What an absolute recipe for disaster. All the government needs to do is insert a new provision in the bill that specifically carves out and protects the subcontracting arrangements from the new broader definitions contained in this bill. Not only is this consistent and does it give effect to the minister’s stated intention in his speech, but it also provides certainty and assurances to the thousands of businesses that rely on their subcontracting arrangements to remain viable.

Given that the amendments will have retrospective application to licence applications under clause 29 of the bill, the government needs to make urgent amendments to protect businesses from facing noncompliance with the act. In recommendation 5 of the review Mr Wilson recommended that additional powers be given to the Labour Hire Authority to assist its investigations and prosecute providers. Specifically, the review recommends that the Labour Hire Authority be given the power to compel the production of documents where they consider the documents are necessary to ensure compliance with the act. As a matter of principle, we do not object to the government regulators being given the powers they need to ensure licence-holders and businesses are complying with the act. However, the new powers the government is proposing to provide the Labour Hire Authority amount to nothing more than a wet lettuce leaf. These so-called new powers to compel the production of documents and information are completely useless. Under the bill, if a person receives a notice to produce documents, the person can simply refuse to provide anything. They do not even need to provide an excuse – what a farce. What is this provision even for? It is a complete waste of the inspector’s time. If the inspector wants to try again, they can issue another notice. But they are required to tell the person, and if they think the documents might incriminate them and expose them to a penalty, they can refuse to provide the information. It is an absolute joke. This bill was meant to clean up the labour hire industry from corruption and thugs. Instead these new powers will continue to give cowboy operators and thugs a free ride.

When Wilson recommended that the new powers be given to inspectors, he referred to the powers used by other Victorian regulators, such as the Essential Services Commission. The powers in sections 39B and 39ZC of the Essential Services Commission Act 2001 expressly removed the ability of a person to refuse to hand over documents on the basis the documents might incriminate them. Even at federal law, the Fair Work ombudsman can compel the production of documents, such as payslips, in order to prove if an employer has been underpaying their employees. There is no ability for the employer to withhold this information.

If these powers are good enough for these regulators, which are the same powers that Wilson recommended, why is the Labor government refusing to give meaningful powers to the Labour Hire Authority to clean up the industry? If people in labour hire are breaking the law and exploiting workers, then they should have no right to withhold and refuse to hand over documents. Why would this Labor government want to protect cowboy providers from disclosing documents and information that proves they are exploiting workers, giving them a get-out-of-jail-free card? I really hope that government members on the other side reflect deeply when they look at clause 24 of the bill and realise workers will continue to be exploited under Labor’s watch by allowing cowboy operators the ability to continue to hide and keep secret their unlawful conduct from the Labor Hire Authority under this provision. This is just another example of why this bill is in urgent need of amendment.

In recommendation 6 of the review, Mr Wilson recommended that Labor Hire Authority be given the ability to include ‘contextual information’ in its register in relation to the suspension and cancellation of licences. However, Mr Wilson was quick to point out that there needed to be careful consideration of what information should be published, and there should be explicit protections to ensure people’s private information was respected and ‘constraints on the type and degree of detail in information shared’. Now, regrettably, the Labor government has yet again failed to follow the recommendations of Mr Wilson here. Under clause 20 of the bill, the Labour Hire Authority will be given new powers to publish information, not only about cancelling and suspending licences but also about people they are investigating and monitoring for compliance with the act.

There is also an additional power under clause 28 of the bill that will allow the Labour Hire Authority to disclose any information it considers appropriate in the public interest. As the minister himself said, these amendments ‘go further than the Wilson recommendation’ and will allow the Labour Hire Authority to publish information about a broad range of matters that were not even contemplated by the review. There is another example of this government engaging in massive overreach and simply going far beyond what the Wilson review recommended. Given the sheer breadth of these new powers, there is a dangerous risk that these powers could be misused to name and shame completely innocent businesses. In complete contrast to what Wilson recommended, there are no safeguards in this bill for the potential misuse of this power, which has the real potential to destroy people’s reputations and ruin businesses and jobs. When we communicated these concerns to the minister’s office, they simply said they were happy to consider any of our suggestions, clearly demonstrating that the minister and his office had failed to consider the impact and dangerous misuse of these powers.

These powers were considered by the Australian Law Reform Commission in its report titled Principled Regulation. The report has been relied on around the country by regulators to ensure they conduct themselves appropriately. On page 615 of the report, the Law Reform Commission observed:

… as a general principle no publicity should be attached to the preliminary investigations, or to the execution of warrants or the other exercise of regulator’s coercive powers … irrespective of the regulator’s private views of the likely guilt of a person under investigation, the regulators’ inquiries are incomplete and any comment as to liability is accordingly based on inchoate information.

So the Labor government’s amendments are completely contrary to the Law Reform Commission’s recommendations. As the commission recommended, regulators should first develop guidelines on publishing information to ensure their powers are not abused and only appropriate information is disclosed. We think this legislation goes too far and should be pared back to ensure people and businesses are not subjected to inappropriate naming and shaming.

The final amendment this bill makes is to the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act 2020 to provide protections for whistleblowers who call out illegal activities on Victorian construction sites. Members may recall earlier this year that when this government repealed its unconstitutional wage theft laws it made a swathe of other amendments, including removing whistleblower protections. Section 76 of the former Wage Theft Act 2020 was repealed, meaning the new Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act did not include any protections for whistleblowers. It seems the government has now realised that this was a stupid mistake and is now attempting to reinsert it via this bill.

However, the protections included in the amendment are still insufficient. As the new provision reads in clause 30, it will only protect whistleblowers that provide information about public construction in Victoria. There is no definition in this bill of what ‘public construction’ means, but the minister’s office advised it was only intended to cover government-funded construction sites. That means that any person who seeks to complain about illegal activities on private construction sites will not be covered by the whistleblower protections in this bill. Not long ago we saw Melbourne, our city, our central business district, come to a complete standstill after the CFMEU-organised massive blockades of the Myer Emporium site. Under this bill no-one would be protected if they made complaints about the conduct engaged in on these types of projects. It makes no sense to discriminate between public and private construction projects. The CFMEU certainly does not. The CFMEU will engage in thuggery on any site that they consider will further their interests, and we saw this just recently with their behaviour and thuggery on the North East Link project and the West Gate Tunnel Project. This provision should be amended to cover both private and public construction sites.

The minister also said in his speech that people who took retaliatory action against people who made complaints under this provision would be investigated and prosecuted by Victoria Police. When we asked the minister’s office if any additional funding or resources had been provided to Victoria Police to undertake this work, we were told ‘not at this stage’. Given Labor’s funding cuts to Victoria Police there appears to be little hope Victoria Police will have any resources to prosecute people under this provision, which makes the supposed protection completely hollow. We also discovered that if people wanted to make complaints, they could do so by using the new complaints referral service that was legislated earlier this year. However, as the minister’s office confirmed, the complaints service has not even begun operation. Here we are, a year after the Wilson report was submitted to this Labor government and the complaints service that Wilson recommended is still not operational.

While we will not oppose the passage of this bill through the Assembly, the shadow minister for industrial relations in the other place intends to move amendments to the bill in the Council, otherwise corruption in construction in Victoria will fester. Clearly this Labor government has no real desire to take strong action to stamp out corruption and thuggery on their Big Build infrastructure projects in Victoria. The Allan Labor government’s failure to act has enabled corrupt practices to infiltrate their rotten Big Build projects. Labor has allowed intimidation, bullying of workers – of women – and corruption to thrive in Victoria’s construction industry. Under Premier Allan and Labor the roots of corruption in construction are alive and well. That is why we need a fresh start.

Only the Victorian Liberals and Nationals will establish a royal commission into the CFMEU’s misconduct, corruption and rotten culture, which have plagued the Labor government’s Big Build projects, costing the Victorian economy billions in cost overruns. We will establish Construction Enforcement Victoria, an independent watchdog with real teeth to clean up intimidation, bullying, thuggery and corruption in construction. We will introduce a tough code of practice that construction companies, contractors and unions will have to comply with or risk being banned from tendering for government contracts. For 11 long years this Labor government has allowed the corrupt CFMEU, Labor’s donors, to control construction sites in Victoria through thuggery, intimidation and bullying, and it has led to corruption. Only a Liberals and Nationals government will stand up for workers and contractors, end this era of corruption and clean up the construction industry from intimidation and thugs; the bullying of workers, which has led to deaths of workers; and the bullying of women, which is outrageous and disgusting. Only the Liberals and Nationals will restore law and order on our building sites in Victoria.

I urge the Labor government to consider the many amendments that we will move in the Council on this bill, otherwise corruption will be allowed to continue to fester on construction sites in Victoria, because it only includes government sites, it does not include private construction and it does not include sub-tier construction sites. It is a failure, this bill. It does not implement the recommendations of Wilson, and we would urge the government to consider these amendments to strengthen this bill to ensure that we eradicate corruption from construction sites in Victoria.

 Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (17:25): It is great to rise and speak on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025 and acknowledge the important work that has been done to implement the recommendations of the Wilson review. These are the recommendations that follow some very concerning behaviours in the construction industry that were highlighted and responded to when the Premier announced the Wilson review and its recommendations that were forthcoming. It is a review that has been extensively quoted by the shadow minister for 25 or 26 minutes until the sum-up. It was substantially attacked and politicised at the time yet relied on in terms of the substantive nature, saying it does not go far enough. Then, according to other comments from the shadow minister, it goes too far in its application here as well. Then there was a bit of a discussion around the construction industry. It is curious, some of the commentary around the construction workforce, which is hundreds of thousands of workers across Australia, and some of the members of that union live in all of our electorates as well. The characterisation of the entire construction industry and the way that workers are described is of great concern to me – how they are narrated. They are people who are helping to build our state and contribute to some of its projects. We did not have a Big Build 10, 15 years ago, did we? We did not have a Big Build at all. There was barely a major project. There was a major project at Southern Cross station. It was the deployment of stickers by the Napthine government, trying to find an airport rail that did not exist. That was the major construction and big build agenda at that time.

We have got a pipeline of construction work at the moment that is generational in its significance, and we need to make sure that those that work in that important sector, the construction industry, are supported and protected in their place of work and that they feel safe. This is an element of the Wilson review that we go to. I will touch on some of those changes and recommendations. This amendment enhances Victoria’s labour hire scheme into a stronger and more effective approach to stamping out some of the very concerning corrupt and criminal conduct that we saw on construction sites. It was important that the Premier stood up and called it out. The Premier was strong in her words and had a significant review that has underpinned these recommendations. The bill also amends the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act 2020 to create an offence of causing detriment or threatening to cause detriment to a person making a complaint, which is really important for the protection of those that come forward to detail their experiences. That is a hallmark of some of the recommendations that have come forward here and the really important work here.

The reforms that we are passing now are specifically focused on Victoria’s labour hire regulatory scheme to better weed out those who seek to do the wrong thing and ensure that labour hire workers and those businesses that are doing the right thing are protected from unscrupulous operators. That is some of the really important policy work that has gone through most recently. I want to particularly call out recommendation 3 that is acquitted in this. The bill will strengthen the current fit and proper person test. It will amend current criteria within the legislation, implement new criteria and provide the labour hire authority with broad discretion to consider any matter it considers relevant in deciding whether a person is fit and proper to hold that licence. That gives regulatory flexibility to make those considerations and to consider some of those new factors of the authority. It will enable it to consider a person’s character, honesty, integrity and professionalism and whether a person has been found guilty of an indictable offence in certain circumstances.

It is important, around the narration of some of the parties that we saw featured in some of the really poor behaviour and criminal conduct, that they are restricted, they are not part of infrastructure projects going forward and they are held to account. As union people on this side of the house, as people that support workers in every form and every fashion, that is a critical element of that work and that engagement. This new test will provide the Labour Hire Authority with greater flexibility to consider a wider range of those assessments, and I really welcome that. With the definition of ‘construction activities’, I think people can work out what construction activities are from the definition that we have seen and the discussion that has been had. The narration by the shadow minister was as if that could not be understood, but I think it is the plain meaning of the definition. I do not see it as confusing or riddled, as the shadow minister has put forward, but I acknowledge that it is a subject of their considerations and what has been put forward.

In acquitting recommendation 5 around the labour hire search powers, we acknowledge that this strengthens the authority’s powers with respect to their ability to request a labour hire provider to provide documents and better align their powers to require information within the modern regulations. This amendment in the bill will allow the authority to request information in the manner and form specified, which can include electronic production as well as from third parties. I was really interested in recommendation 6 as well, and the bill also confirms the ability of the labour hire authority to produce additional contextual information about suspensions and cancellations of licences and appropriate limitations.

So we are providing a substantial response there for the authority to make sure that operators, those participating in the construction industry, are held to the highest account. It goes to the hallmarks of the review that was undertaken, at the time attacked by the Liberals and Nationals, and then narrated and quoted with such significant coverage in the shadow minister’s speech. It was literally, I think, 25 minutes of going through how substantial some of those recommendations were. Whether they went further or not is maybe a departure from some of the shadow cabinet’s position just to attack the review. I thought it was a smart presentation from the shadow minister to really acknowledge just how important this review was, the extensive nature of what has been undertaken and how important it is to strengthening the labour hire sector, so I appreciated the shadow minister not going down the pathway of rank politicisation. To the shadow minister’s credit, I thought there was a little bit of leadership there, having the intellectual discussion around the recommendations: not just looking at the word and the person and attacking them and the review but actually analysing and going through the recommendations. I do not share the views of the shadow minister and how they were presented, but they got the work done and said amendments will be moved. Well, that is a lot further from that media release at the time: the review dropped, and the coalition just attacked it all. At least the shadow minister has come in with a bit more consideration and a bit more effort and at least rocked up to the bill brief to interrogate it. I cannot say the same for other shadow colleagues on that side, but at least the work was done on that.

The bill makes other amendments to improve the overall operation of the act and complement the implementation of other Wilson review recommendations, and the bill also makes amendments to the recent passing of the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act. I did note the shadow minister’s criticism of the changes to the wage theft bill. Did anyone tune in to hear that – you know, that one that they vehemently opposed? They were all up for a bit of wage theft. They were opposed to our legislation criminalising this sort of conduct and making sure that workers are protected. I just thought that sort of volley was a bit interesting, because it was this Labor government who absolutely smashed wage theft and who protected workers. The values of this Allan Labor government are to be on the side of workers and protect workers into the future. It would not have been a coalition government that would have bundled up better wage theft protection, would it? It would not have been that crew over there. Talk about turning a blind eye. We would not have seen any action on that into the future either. So the volley before was curious because the only reason that exists is the leadership of the former Premier Daniel Andrews and the leadership of the Allan Labor government to get that in. Now it is a model for the rest of the nation and how we protect the rights, wages and conditions of working Victorians.

We have seen significant reforms in this space. This government leans in when there is a challenge that is presented like this that is significant on a particular sector and industry. The Premier fronted up, answered the questions and delivered the review, and now we are implementing the recommendations. That is true leadership here – not the rank politicisation that we see too often on that side but leadership around supporting workers in the future and protecting people in their place of work. These reforms under the labour hire legislation here today strengthen that and complete the Wilson recommendations, and I commend the bill to the house.

 Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (17:35): I rise to contribute to the Labor Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. This is the second of the Allan Labor government’s legislative responses to the Wilson review into alleged criminal activity on Victorian government construction sites. Let us remember how we got here. The shadow minister of course touched on this and contributed a very strong 30 minutes, and you could probably go for longer on this as well. A string of damning media investigations – 60 Minutes, the Age and others – is what it took to expose what many in the industry had whispered for years about these serious allegations.

Tim Richardson interjected.

Jade BENHAM: But what I like to do in this place is of course give my electorate’s perspective on these bills and the real-world implications, member for Mordialloc. This is overreach. We know that; that has been illustrated. And it is in response to the Wilson review, all about government construction sites and the CFMEU; we know all that. What it does do, though, is make life incredibly hard, more difficult, for food producers in the Mildura electorate – in fact everywhere in Victoria. And how does it do that? Story time; indulge me. The Labour Hire Authority, when it came in, was imposed on small agribusinesses – anyone that uses a contractor. That is how farms operate these days, particularly in irrigated horticulture, where they need a large workforce. Those out harvesting wheat, barley, oats, whatever at the moment, tend to do it with a much smaller workforce, but those that need large workforces for harvest time – with permanent plantings, pruning, spraying, all that kind of stuff, and picking of course – require the services of contractors, as they used to be known. Now they are labour hire services. When the Labour Hire Authority was first established I was in local government, and the sentiment of food producers in the region was one of confusion, it was one of anger and it was one of frustration because of the added bureaucratic red-tape timelines that this creates for, in a lot of cases, family businesses that are already being strangled in red tape. I talk about this all the time: the amount of audits that they have to go through, the amount of paperwork for visas and now the Labour Hire Authority. It is making life so much more difficult for food producers than it has ever been before. I say this along with all the other challenges that they have to put up with.

Under this bill the definition of ‘labour hire services’ is expanded to include arrangements defined by their character and the totality of the relationship. That means the Labour Hire Authority could decide that any farm that sources, coordinates or even facilitates workers between different growers – and that happens – might suddenly be classed as a labour hire business, even if that is not their main role and even if they are using labour hire providers. In my electorate, where growers often share workers or they share farm, they use local contractors, like I said, for pruning, harvest, packing, picking. They might pool staff to save a bit of money. Those arrangements could now fall under the Labour Hire Authority’s remit, meaning extra licensing fees and paperwork for small farm businesses and the real risk of unintentional noncompliance. This is a real fear for food producers and for farm managers in the larger corporate structure farms, of which we are seeing more now because it is simply not viable for family farms to continue to farm the way they used to – they simply cannot do it. Those unintentional noncompliance issues are a real problem. Again, it adds to the load that farmers are under with regard to their mental health.

They struggle. Not only are they growing food to put on your plate, they are going through all this administrative rigmarole day after day after day and then being made to feel like they are already criminals before they have even commenced any work – before anything has even been proven or alleged. They feel like this is being imposed on them because of what has allegedly happened with the CFMEU on taxpayer-funded worksites. That is a real risk and a real concern for food producers.

There is also the potential for – and this is not just a potential – regulatory confusion between farms, farmers, managers, contractors and pack houses, especially those in mixed use or share farming, like I said, which happens. Farmers already have very, very limited faith in the Labour Hire Authority. It is viewed across the Mallee as bureaucratic, inconsistent and city-centric – surprise, surprise – and it is an authority that makes regional operators jump through hoops while often turning a blind eye to what is going on in the city.

This bill also means for farmers and agribusinesses more inspectors on farms looking for records. We have had issues of course with the VicGrid bill and VicGrid workers being able to waltz onto farms unannounced, which is a massive biosecurity risk. Biosecurity is a real issue for us in this state. I am not sure that anyone on that side is aware of how much of an issue it is, but it absolutely is. I was talking to some people from the citrus industry at lunchtime about fire blight and fruit fly. You have the ground-borne diseases that can be in someone’s shoes, and if they do not know who is coming onto the farm and when and where they have been, that is such an issue. It also gives the Labour Hire Authority the power to publish the names of companies even before decisions are made, to compel information and delegate coercive powers to contractors and to judge character without defined criteria. That is not integrity, that is overreach. That creates uncertainty and reputational risk, and in such small rural communities reputation is everything. It opens the door to selective and inconsistent enforcement.

Procedural fairness, you would think, should not be optional. It should be built into laws like this. So, no, we are not a fan of it, because of the unintended consequences that I am sure have not been given a second thought by this government. Farmers are never given a second thought by this government. That has been proven time and time again by the mere fact that farmers are at the end of their tether – they really are – with the bureaucracy, the administration and the ever-continuing changes in laws and regulation and compliance. It is just getting beyond a doubt. And despite all this, the CFMEU loophole still remains. The fit and proper person test applies only to the licence holder, not to the individuals actually sent onto worksites. Guess who ends up liable on a farm? The owner or the manager. That is before anything has been proven – the owner or the manager. I just cannot get my head around the complete lack of common sense in some of this legislation, honestly.

Also, let me point out – and this was pointed out when the Labour Hire Authority was first established – that it is not hard to go and find someone with an ABN or an ACN, get a legitimate one of those, and then go to a Labour Hire Authority website and find their Labour Hire Authority provider number and match them up so that a labour hire provider can have these two numbers and go to a farmer and give them both of those numbers and they match. What is the farmer supposed to do?

He can look them up on those websites, but they match. So how is he to know that that is not a holding company that is under this person? And it could be someone completely illegal that is not licensed or registered. It is so fraught with danger, and the one who ends up responsible for it is the bloody farmer again, and we are so sick of it. Time and time and time again I stand up in this place for our farmers, and it is just absolutely ridiculous.

 Meng Heang TAK (Clarinda) (17:45): I am delighted to rise today to make a contribution on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025 and speak on this bill a number of times, and I will come back to the bill just a little bit later. But just to continue on from the member for Mildura from the other side, who talked about standing up for farmers, I have much appreciation for farmers and farming business operators, but we also stand up for the workers. I just would like to say that labour hire is an issue for many in my electorate, and I try to make an effort to speak on and support positive change in this policy area whenever I can, because it really does affect many living in my district of Clarinda and communities like mine.

It is an interesting experience if you come to Springvale South, especially in the early hours of the morning around the Springvale South market, where you will see streams of white minibuses, still today, 20 years, 30 years on, moving through the suburb around the market, picking up passengers as they go and heading off to different locations in the south-east. The vans might be heading south to one of our farms in the outer south-east or further to out to Gippsland, or they may be heading into the city, to construction sites, to conduct asbestos removal, labouring or general construction, or to factories across metropolitan Melbourne. It is a real sight. These minibuses vans are everywhere in the early morning.

When I came to this place, at the same time as you, Deputy Speaker, in 2018, our labour hire licensing laws were just taking effect. I have seen up close what it was like for so many of those workers. I just would like to add my own experience. Back in 1998 during summer school I actually went with my father to Mildura to pick oranges. We did not know much about our rights as workers. It was cash in hand, $6 or $8 per hour. We would stay with many other workers potentially from the south-east all the way to Mildura and for 8 hours a day with no penalty rates. It could be hot, winter or rainy; it did not really matter, so long as we could get some money in the pocket for summer. These are the things. But imagine it for those who come across the sea to our wonderful state and work. Imagine the working conditions if we do not have proper protections for those workers. Imagine what would be missing. That is why I am very passionate and honoured to make a contribution on this bill.

There were some really great examples that were uncovered during the Forsyth inquiry and in the media, where single labour hire contractors were exploiting hundreds of workers at a time. Covino Farms was one example. It was one of Australia’s biggest salad and vegetable growers, supplying supermarket chains and fast-food outlets, including KFC, Red Rooster, Subway and so on and so forth.

The inquiry heard that around 100 migrant workers engaged at Covino Farm through Sam Huor were grossly underpaid, worked excessive hours and did not receive superannuation. These are the things that we are standing for. Once again, imagine those who come across the sea to find a better life and do not know much about workers rights – so long as they get a job, get paid, come home and put food on the table. These are the kinds of things that we cannot allow to happen in our wonderful state. At the time the then National Union of Workers established that these 100 workers were owed at least $1.2 million in unpaid wages. Many of my constituents and family members of my constituents were caught up in that exploitation, and unfortunately there were many other examples of exploitation of people in similar situations and on other farms all across the state. So I give thanks to the National Union of Workers, now the United Workers Union, for their hard work and their dedication to supporting those workers and for helping so many of my electorate across the state to raise their voice, to come together to collectively bargain to end that exploitation for so many and to so significantly improve the work conditions across a big part of the industry. It was a really humbling experience to see that happening back in 2008 and see this place make a contribution.

Allow me to commend the member for Narre Warren South in his role then as the Victorian branch secretary and Dr Carina Garland, now the federal member for Chisholm, in her role with that union then. It was great to work alongside these friends and colleagues and the amazing organisations and members to see those changes taking place. The wages and conditions that we see now are a testament to those workers who decided to take a stand, were supported by the union and as a result had some really significant victories that have made our community a better place. These are the things that we are standing up for – for the workers – so thank you to everyone involved in that campaign. The improvements to our labour hire licensing scheme continue here today in this bill.

The Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025 key objective is to give effect to the government’s commitment to implementing recommendations 3 to 6 of the Wilson review by amending the Victorian labour hire licensing laws. These amendments, as has already been pointed out by the great member for Mordialloc, will strengthen the fit and proper person test with respect to labour hire licensing, amend the definition of a ‘labour hire provider’ to align more closely with industry practices and to provide a greater clarity, and streamline the Labour Hire Authority’s information-gathering powers to allow the Labour Hire Authority greater scope to publish information with respect to licensing decisions. These are very important.

As I spoke about before, we have had the Forsyth and Wilson reviews, both of which have played a very important part in informing our labour hire laws. We see that these changes here will give effect to recommendations 3 to 6 of the Wilson review by replacing the current fit and proper person test with a new test which enables the Labour Hire Authority to consider a broader range of matters when assessing the suitability of an applicant for labour hire licensing, which is very relevant to this.

The bill will also make additional amendments to the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2018 aimed at improving the overall operations of the Victorian labour hire licensing scheme, including a financial viability requirement and a broader public interest disclosure power.

These are strong changes, informed by the Wilson review, and changes that I am so proud to support here today. I am also proud to be part of a government that stands up with Victorian workers on labour hire licensing, on wage theft, on workplace manslaughter, on occupational health and safety and on so much more. I commend the minister for bringing this bill forward, and I commend it to the house.

 Wayne FARNHAM (Narracan) (17:55): I am happy to rise on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. It has been stated why we are where we are today. A lot of this bill has come about because of the CFMEU’s behaviour and obviously recommendations from the Wilson review. That being said – and we have heard a bit from people today – we have to understand construction to understand why this has happened and why we are here. It is no secret. I am going to start with this. First and foremost, there are very, very good people in the CFMEU. I was a member of the CFMEU, I employed people that were members of the CFMEU and I still have friends in the CFMEU that work on government construction sites. That is very important to remember. A very small portion of people in the CFMEU are why we have ended up where we are today, and we have ended up here today with this labour hire bill because of the protections that are needed now.

But it cannot be taken away that the government ignored this problem for the best part of a decade. It is no secret that the now Premier, who was the minister for infrastructure, knew about the corruption. She knew about the bullying, and she knew it as Premier. There is no doubt about that. You cannot deny that. You cannot be a minister in this state doing the biggest infrastructure program this state has seen and say, ‘I knew nothing about it.’ That is rubbish – that is absolute rubbish.

The Wilson review came about because of the behaviour of a small portion of members of the CFMEU, and their behaviour has been disgraceful. We do not oppose this bill, but I see holes in this bill, and the problem I see is that we have to have a fit and proper person test now for the principal of the labour hire company. Everybody knows I have been in this industry a long time, 30-odd years. The problem I see in the industry is we used to use labour hire as a last resort; now we are using it as a first resort. The principal contractors in Victoria have become lazy. They do not want to employ people, and they grab labour hire. The corruption that has come through because of this has come through labour hire companies. Yes, there could be principals involved. But the problem I am having is with the people the labour hire companies are employing. That is where the bullying is coming from, and that is where the intimidation is coming from onsite.

As I said, I have friends in there, and I know what is going on. This is where this bill misses the mark. We cannot stamp out corruption. You may have a fit and proper principal, but if they are employing bikies, if they are employing drug dealers, if they are employing people that have been charged with assault and they are coming on to our construction sites, how are we going to stop the corruption? That is the question that cannot be answered.

The member for Mordialloc mentioned in his contribution that this side of the chamber is turning a blind eye. The Labor government turned a blind eye for the best part of a decade, and it was not until Nick McKenzie and the Age and 60 Minutes came out and exposed the corruption with video footage of cash handouts, intimidation and phone calls that this came to bear. This has been a failure of government, which is why we are where we are today. Even yesterday John Setka was arrested for threatening Mark Irving KC.

Even when he is not in the union, he is still behaving like a thug. And who can forget the footage we saw of those women getting beaten up and intimidated? This does nothing to protect them. You may have the fit and proper principal, but it is the people underneath. This does nothing to protect those women. Who can forget the story of the young man that went home and suicided because of the behaviour of CFMEU reps? They were not principals. That young man went home and suicided. Who can forget the footage of the CFMEU reps that were threatening the Aboriginal labour hire company guys, who were just sitting down having a smoko, and the language they used and the threats that they made. This bill does nothing to protect them – absolutely nothing.

Between 2010 and 2014 we had a building and construction commission that was there to curb the behaviour of corrupt individuals within the CFMEU, and it worked. I had to ring that commission when I had CFMEU reps come onsite and go beyond their remit. It worked; it curbed the behaviour. So the real question is: is this bill going to curb that behaviour? Is this bill going to quell the behaviour of the CFMEU or the people on the labour hire companies on government sites? I do not see it.

I will say this: I agree that the principal of the company should pass a fit and proper person test – totally agree, 100 per cent. I have no problem with that; the problem for me is the employment. As I said, part of this problem in this industry now is that principal contractors have become lazy. They do not want to employ people directly anymore. They want to go through labour hire. I guarantee if they were employing the people directly to work on government Big Build sites, they are not going to employ a bikie from the Hells Angels or someone that has been charged with aggravated assault. This is where the problem lies. It is not necessarily the principals, it is the people underneath them.

The other concern I have at the moment – and I would like the government to address this because this is still a concern – is we know that Incolink gave money to the CFMEU for, loosely worded, ‘training purposes’. Millions and millions of dollars go to the CFMEU, an organisation that at the moment is in administration. They are still getting the money for ‘training’, but there is no reporting on that. We also know that money ends up back in Labor. If this government was serious about getting rid of the corruption, they would cease that donation. You should not let Incolink donate to the CFMEU when they are under administration and known to be dishonest. Why would we let that happen?

I am more passionate about the construction industry than anyone in this chamber. They all know it, and this is why I am saying it. This will not go far enough. When the federal Labor government got rid of the union watchdog federally, the CFMEU just went nuts. That is when the floodgates really opened up. The corruption has always been there from the BLF, which morphed into the CFMEU. Mechanisms were put in place to quell that behaviour and that corruption. But both Vic Labor and federal Labor got rid of both corruption watchdogs, and now we are where we are today.

I feel for every member of the CFMEU that has had to put up with the intimidation, the bullying and the threats from the small portion of the CFMEU. They are the ones we want to get out, but they are coming in through the labour hire companies. It is no secret. That is why in 2024 we introduced a bill for police checks on government building sites, and I still think that should happen. I am a firm believer in that. Police checks are not unusual. They take about 24 to 48 hours to do. It is not onerous. Let us really weed out the corruption. Let us get rid of it, because I hate it in this industry. My friends are still putting up with this corruption and bullying going on. We do not oppose this bill, but I think it misses the mark.

 John LISTER (Werribee) (18:05): I am here to speak in support of the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. It is part of a series of legislation that we have had at least since my time here in Parliament, since the start of the year, that goes to strengthening our system around employment and what we are doing on our government sites as well and strengthening that labour hire system, protecting the rights and safety of workers across our state, including in my electorate of Werribee. I will get to that in just a moment.

In Werribee we are a proud growing community. We have got a local economy powered by hardworking men and women across construction, logistics, warehousing, cleaning and manufacturing – industries that rely heavily on labour hire. These are the people who are building our new schools, laying the foundations for our housing estates, expanding the Werribee Mercy Hospital precinct and keeping our local economy moving. This bill is about protecting them – our workers, our families and our community – from those who think that they can cut corners, exploit labour or profit from corruption. It is particularly important in my electorate because construction and similar industries are about the third-largest employer in my electorate. People who are in this industry are not just working on projects in Werribee but working right across the state on many of our Big Build projects to help the rest of Melbourne.

The Labour Hire Authority does vital work regulating an industry that underpins so much of Victoria’s economy, but it needs the right tools, and that is what this bill delivers. It strengthens the fit and proper person test for those seeking a labour hire licence and it ensures the authority can consider not just a company’s financial record but the honesty, integrity and professionalism of the people behind it. I note in the bill clause 10 substitutes section 22 of the act to include that fit and proper person test. It provides that in determining if someone is fit and proper they need to have a person’s history of compliance with the laws specified in the act, the person’s capacity to comply with those laws, whether the person has previously held a licence that has been cancelled or suspended, whether the authority has imposed one or more conditions on a licence held by the person and, within the preceding 10 years, whether that person has been found guilty of an indictable offence, if a conviction was recorded or the authority considers the offence to be relevant to the person’s suitability to provide labour hire services. This matters deeply in places like Werribee, where small and medium businesses play a huge role in local construction and logistics.

Most operators in Werribee do the right thing. They follow the rules, pay their workers fairly and contribute to our community. This bill protects those honest businesses by cracking down on the ones that do not. We have all heard of cases where workers have been underpaid, and we have had legislation recently in the Parliament around that with contractors where workers have been misled or even intimidated. Sadly, some of those stories have come from worksites not far from home. This government’s message is simple: that kind of behaviour has no place in my electorate, and it has no place anywhere in Victoria.

The reforms in the bill respond directly to the Wilson review, which examined the conduct of companies and unions on government construction projects. Greg Wilson’s review exposed examples of criminal and coercive behaviour that undermine the safety and trust of our worksites. His recommendations were clear: strengthen oversight, empower regulators and make sure corruption has nowhere to hide.

In Werribee we are seeing major government investment in our roads, schools, rail and health services. From the Princes Freeway upgrades and the work that we are doing on the interchange to the Werribee Open Range Zoo expansion, government projects are creating jobs and shaping our city’s future. We need to make sure that every dollar spent on these projects is going to ethical, law-abiding businesses that treat their workers with dignity and respect.

Earlier in the week I went out to one of our Big Build sites that we are working on at the Ison Road–Werribee Main Road interchange. It was night works, and I had a chance to speak to some of the contractors and some of their managers who were there and talk about the processes that they had in place to make sure that the people who were on that site were the right people and make sure that they took value from that work as well. A lot of them are local people. It was great to speak to one person who was from just up the road in Wyndham Vale. He said it was great doing night works because he could get home to bed in only a few minutes. This is the important reason for having these protections. It is to protect the rights of workers like that who are just trying to do their job the best they can for the community that they love.

This bill delivers on four of Wilson’s recommendations, including those search powers for the Labour Hire Authority, clearer definitions of construction activities and new publication powers to increase transparency. That means that when a dodgy operator is caught out, the community, including people in my electorate, can see it. That transparency helps rebuild public trust in the industry. This bill also amends the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act 2020 to create a new offence for causing detriment or threatening someone who makes a complaint or provides information to the workforce inspectorate. Coming from a school, I know there is the adage that ‘snitches get stitches’, but that is just not an acceptable way to behave, particularly when you should be a professional in what is one of our biggest industries. It does not matter if you are on the tools or not. Everyone should be acting professionally when they are in the workplace. It is important for workers who come from my electorate. Many of them are young, new to Australia or working casually in industries where they might feel they cannot speak up. They need to know that if they see wrongdoing, they can report it safely without fear of intimidation or reprisal.

Speaking of some of these potential new workers, I took some of the students I used to teach at Wyndham Central College out to one of our Big Build sites. They are all in our vocational education and training program, and one of the things they noted about these sites was it is not just the jobs that you are doing around there and the different types of systems that you are installing, whether or not they are electrical or plumbing at the Werribee Hospital site, but just the way that the worksite is set up. It had the right posters up. It had clear information about who was in charge. There were good safety practices on the site. When you walk in, it almost feels like you are walking into a corporate office in Melbourne, and you feel that professionalism. That is taken into the worksite once you cross that threshold with your PPE. You feel that professionalism in the workplace once you are actually on the build site. It is really important to make sure that we have those rules in the background to continue to maintain that professional culture on our worksites, particularly those that the government is funding.

Anyone who tries to threaten or silence a whistleblower will now face harsh penalties of up to 10 years in prison. That sends a strong message to anyone who thinks they can operate above this law. It is part of a broader package of reforms, delivering all eight of Greg Wilson’s recommendations, which I touched on before, and there have been quite a few different pieces of legislation through the Parliament this year, including the Wage Theft Amendment Bill 2025, which I know I spoke on quite passionately here as well. That was about implementing recommendations 3 through 6, strengthening the Labour Hire Authority’s regulatory reach and improving accountability across the sector. And we are not stopping there. Work is underway to ensure that principal contractors on government-funded projects must report any criminal conduct onsite. This is about creating a system that works not just in the Melbourne’s CBD but in regional and outer-metro communities like mine, where those major government projects are transforming lives and creating job opportunities.

This bill also aligns with the government’s wider efforts to make the construction industry safer and more inclusive. In my electorate we have seen real progress through initiatives like the Building Equality Policy, which is opening up new training and employment pathways for women in trades. We have got local women working on projects like the Werribee Hospital expansion and level crossing removals, and some of the young women from the school training program had a chance to meet with a few of the women who were working on the Werribee Hospital contract and see that these sites do not need to be that old vision of a gendered worksite. Your ability to work on a building site should depend on the ticket that you hold and the skills that you have, not on what your identity may be as a person. That is the kind of cultural change this government is proud to support, and it goes hand in hand with stamping out that criminal and exploitative practice that holds people back and makes those worksites unsafe places for people to be.

The Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill is about fairness, safety and accountability. It gives the Labour Hire Authority the power to keep bad actors in check. It protects whistleblowers. It strengthens public confidence in our construction sector. Most importantly, it ensures that communities like mine, where hard work, honesty and fairness are part of who we are, can continue to thrive. To every worker in my electorate who turns up each morning to build, clean, drive or deliver, this bill is about protecting you. I commend this bill to the house.

 Peter WALSH (Murray Plains) (18:15): I rise to make my contribution on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. In starting off I ask the rhetorical question of the house: whatever happened to an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay? The fact that we are here debating this bill just says the system is broken. That is very sad for us as a state and us as a nation in our international standing and in our competitiveness in the world market. I will touch on some of the things out of that as I go through.

I think there should be absolute outrage from the Victorian public that we have got to where we are now, because it is the Victorian public, it is the Victorian taxpayer, who pays for the cost overruns on our major projects and who pays for the bad work practices on our major projects. On all government projects where there are bad work practices and cost overruns, it is the Victorian taxpayer that pays. Who knows what the real number is – it is somewhere between $40 billion and $50 billion in cost overruns on major projects here in Melbourne. Some of that is around poor contractual arrangements and allowing costs to blow out with variations in the contract. But most people think that it is the Big Build and the poor work practices on the Big Build that have led to a lot of those cost overruns and part of the huge debt that the Victorian taxpayers will have into the future.

As other people who have contributed this bill have talked about, there was the Wilson inquiry, and this is legislation to respond to some of the Wilson inquiry. The fact, again, that we had to have the Wilson inquiry says our system here in Victoria is broken. Having this cosy relationship between big construction companies and the CFMEU in particular has not delivered well for Victoria. It has delivered a very, very poor outcome if you look at those cost overruns and if you look at the work practices that then flow through to other worksites, because there is competition in the marketplace for building workers. If the government is paying a higher wage, people will obviously want to go and work there; I do not begrudge people getting the higher wage if it is being paid. But it has driven up the cost of construction for the rest of Victoria. Even in regional Victoria, there are plenty of people that come to Melbourne to work on those projects if they can get the big dollars – and I do not blame them doing that. But it has driven up the cost of all construction right across Victoria.

The member for Mildura made some comments around labour hire and farming and particularly the horticulture industry. I want to endorse the comments that the member for Mildura made, because a lot of farmers are caught in a catch 22 situation in that historically they have used labour hire companies to provide them labour. Depending on the season and depending on what they are doing in that particular season, whether they are pruning, thinning, picking or packing, they need large numbers of people for a short period of time but then maybe not for a period of time after that. It is impractical for them to directly employ all those people because they would be pulling them on and off, and a labour hire company working with other growers in a similar area can actually manage the work that is available to the people that come there to work. It gives them, whether they be backpackers or casual employees, the consistency of work when they come to a particular region. A labour hire company can make sure they have got work all the time, rather than individual farmers pulling them on and off and those workers having to then go and find another place to work. That worked well for many years.

We has now come to the situation under the chain of command with the contract labour hire legislation that we have in this state that a worker could work for a labour hire company and not have the appropriate visa or the right paperwork and the labour hire company actually allows them to work. There is a contract between the worker and the labour hire company, and there is a contract between the labour hire company and the farmer. The farmer pays the labour hire company in good faith that he or she provide X number of workers for that particular property. But if it is then found later on that the labour hire company did not actually have the paperwork right and some of those workers did not have the right visas to actually be working in those jobs, it is the farmer that is ultimately responsible.

That puts a huge onus on the farmer to check what the labour hire company should be doing in their own business about the validity of those workers to work. I think that is wrong. Again, if there is a relationship between the worker and the labour hire company, that is where the liability should lie. It should not be passed onto the farmer as someone who is liable for something they do not actually have any control over.

It is important that we create the best environment in Victoria for people to create jobs and actually be able to get the employees they need to do that, for those employees to be treated fairly and paid correctly and for all the rules to be followed. No-one wants to get outside the rules as far as pay and conditions for workers go, but ultimately there needs to be trust in the steps – that this person is responsible for the hire and the labour hire company and the farmer have a contractual arrangement to deliver that service. It should not be the farmer that is liable for what the labour hire company does or does not do about vetting those workers that come onto that particular property.

I would like to endorse what the member for Mildura said and see some changes to that, because at the moment a lot of the large horticultural businesses here in Victoria are starting to say, ‘This is just getting all too hard; we actually don’t want to be doing this,’ because there are enough cost pressures for them. Most of the prices are export prices, so there is competition from Chile and South Africa in a lot of their markets, and they are worried about the cost of energy and the cost of water, with the Commonwealth in the water market competing against farmers being a big issue. And then there is this issue around labour – getting the labour and then the responsibilities they have that for things that are effectively outside their control because they have to do the labour hire company’s work for them in vetting all those things.

The other thing I want to touch on is that the cost overruns and the failures of major projects here in Victoria are not limited to Melbourne. People in this house that have been here for a while would have heard me talk a number of times about a project called the Murray Basin rail project, a project that was going to standardise and modernise all the freight rail line network in west and north-west Victoria to give farmers the freight efficiency they need to get their product to port to export. It would take trucks off the roads, make it easier for farmers to get to port and keep the roads in a lot better condition – and we see how bad the roads are in Victoria. But that particular project fell foul of poor engineering control but particularly of poor workforce. There are numerous photos around of how poorly the job was done, how the standardised track was laid. The plates that go on to actually hold the railway line down were not driven in with the spikes properly or not even done; they just sat there because there just was not the work control over the contractors that were doing that particular work.

That is a project that meant so much to north-west Victoria. Six hundred million dollars went west. The Mildura line is the only line that is standardised. It has not been standardised to the condition where we get the line speeds that we need to get 24-hour train services to cart freight from Mildura to Melbourne. It is an issue of labour hire contract management by the Labor government not delivering for regional Victoria – surprise, surprise. Who was the minister responsible at that particular time? It was the now Premier, who eventually, after a lot of debates and a lot of criticism, particularly from our side of the house, effectively got to the end of it. After getting another $200 million out of the federal government to try and finish that project she put her hand up and said, ‘I’ve done what I can do. This is an issue for a future government.’ Six hundred million dollars was gone, and one railway line was upgraded and standardised, and not to the standard that was needed. That is just another example of how poor this government has been at project management and contract labour management. We have had all that money spent and a very, very poor outcome for north-west Victoria. Given the debt that we have here in Victoria, it is going to be a big challenge and a long time before another government will actually have the resources to go in and try and fix that project in the future.

This bill is a necessary step forward, but it is a very sad that we have actually come to this and that we have got this cosy relationship that has enabled very poor work practices to flourish on Victorian building sites. I would like to see that stamped out in the future so Victorian taxpayers get better value for their dollar.

 Anthony CIANFLONE (Pascoe Vale) (18:25): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025, which goes to the heart of fairness, integrity and safety in Victoria’s construction and building sectors. This is a bill that is about restoring confidence in an industry that builds our schools, our transport, our hospitals and our homes. It is about saying clearly and unequivocally that corruption, criminality and intimidation have no place on Victorian construction sites and no place in a sector that employs thousands of hardworking Victorians, including many from my communities of Pascoe Vale, Coburg and Brunswick West, who I will touch on soon. It is about supporting the many honest labour hire providers, contractors and workers – good people doing the right thing every day who deserve a system that protects them, not one that is exploited by those who seek to do wrong.

Last year the Victorian Labor government of course commissioned the Wilson review, a comprehensive and independent investigation led by the highly respected servant Greg Wilson. The review examined how Victorian government bodies interact with construction companies and construction unions in the wake of harrowing and deeply troubling allegations of criminal and unlawful conduct at Victorian government worksites. The findings of the Wilson review were sobering. They highlighted a rotten culture of coercion, intimidation and lawlessness in parts of the construction supply chain, and they identified labour hire as one of the most problematic areas. Workers were being exposed to threats, businesses were structuring themselves to evade regulation and some operators were hiding in the shadows of a complex supply chain designed to frustrate oversight. And yet despite these challenges the review also told us something incredibly important – that Victoria does have the tools to fix this if we strengthen the laws, enforce the rules and give regulators the power they need to act, and this bill does exactly that.

This bill delivers on recommendations 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Wilson review, and it builds on the strong track record of this government in cleaning up the construction sector. On (1) strengthening the fit and proper person test, which is recommendation 3 of the report, currently the test is too narrow and too prescriptive. The Wilson review found that it failed to capture individuals with serious red flags, including criminal history, systemic coercive behaviour and a pattern of evasion. The bill broadens the test substantially. It aligns Victoria’s framework with the best elements of the Queensland model and ensures the Labour Hire Authority can consider a person’s honesty, integrity and professionalism, the presence of indictable offences in certain circumstances and, critically, whether a person is under the influence or control of another who is not a fit and proper person. The wider net ensures the Labour Hire Authority can weed out bad actors before they are able to exploit vulnerable workers. This is a preventative regulation, not a reactive clean-up, and that is exactly what the sector needs.

On (2) clarifying which construction activities are covered – that is recommendation 4 of the Wilson review – we know some operators have deliberately structured themselves to avoid regulation. They have found loopholes in definitions. They have split work across entities. They have hidden behind intermediaries to dodge scrutiny. The Wilson review identified this behaviour as a serious threat to transparency and accountability. This bill fixes that. It tightens the definition of ‘providing labour hire services’, ensuring it captures arrangements where the real character of the agreement is the supply of labour and that labour is performed by workers of the provider or another provider. It focuses on the substance of the arrangement, not the window-dressing. This is a major step forward in stopping the avoidance tactics that have undermined the integrity of the entire regulatory system.

With (3) we are strengthening the powers to obtain documents, which goes to recommendation 5. Under the current model, inspectors often need to conduct a physical entry before they can request documents, an outdated approach that does not reflect the complexity of modern labour hire operations, and this bill modernises those powers. It allows the authority to request documents, including electronically, without first needing to enter a premises. It allows requests from third parties connected to the business, and it establishes a formal notice-to-produce mechanism. This matters because investigations often hinge on records that can vanish on short notice when unscrupulous operators catch wind of enforcement. This reform gives the authority the tools it needs to enforce the law properly.

With (4) we are expanding publication powers, which goes to recommendation 6. Transparency of course is one of the best disinfectants. This bill expands the Labour Hire Authority’s ability to publish contextual information about licence cancellation, licence suspension, investigations and enforcement actions. This is about ensuring the public and the industry know who is doing the wrong thing and what the consequences are. It shines a light on the behaviour the Wilson review found was often deliberately hidden from the public eye. For reputable labour hire firms this transparency is a welcome protection, while for those who engage in shady conduct it is a warning.

Of course this bill will also include several other complementary reforms to lift overall integrity across the building and construction sector, including expanding the list of laws that licence-holders must comply with, requiring providers to demonstrate the financial viability of their business, strengthening the offence of hindering or obstructing Labour Hire Authority staff and allowing the labour hire commissioner to disclose information to other government agencies where it is in the public interest.

These improvements help ensure the system functions cohesively and responds to emerging risks. No reform effort, no matter how strong, will succeed unless the people on the ground feel safe enough to report the wrongdoing, and the Wilson report made it clear that intimidation, threats and retaliation were being used to silence those who tried to raise concerns. This bill responds by creating a new offence in the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act 2020 – causing detriment or threatening to cause detriment to a person for making a complaint or providing information – and the penalties are deliberately severe: up to 1200 penalty units, up to 10 years imprisonment, or both. This is how seriously this government takes intimidation and threats on construction sites. No worker, no subcontractor, no clerk and no apprentice should ever be afraid to speak up about wrongdoing. This offence makes it clear that if you threaten someone to keep quiet you will face serious consequences.

We are also looking at delivering on the Wilson review’s every single recommendation. Earlier this year we passed amendments to establish the Workforce Inspectorate complaints referral function, acquitting recommendation 1. The policy work is underway to implement recommendation 7, and the final recommendation provides for an evaluation of the reforms two years after implementation. By passing this bill, Victoria will have acquitted all legislative reforms arising from the Wilson review, ensuring we have a modern, robust and accountable labour hire system.

In my electorate, Pascoe Vale is home to many hardworking families, tradies, apprentices, engineers, labourers and subcontractors. Many come from culturally and linguistically diverse and migrant communities, bringing skills, determination and pride to their work. According to the 2021 ABS census, my community of Merri-Bek is home to many workers associated with the building and construction industry. There are 6500 people directly employed in the construction sector; that is 7 per cent of local workers. There are 4500 in the manufacturing sector; that is almost 5 per cent of local workers. There are 3900 transport sector workers – almost 4.2 per cent of local workers. In terms of jobs associated with the construction industry, there are 9700 employed as technical or trade workers; that is 10.5 per cent of local workers. There are 5800 labourers; that is 6.2 per cent, which is a big margin in my community. There are 3400 machinery operators – 3.7 per cent. In terms of businesses in the construction industry, 2500 are businesses directly engaged in the construction industry – 15.5 per cent. The biggest cohort of businesses in my community is from the construction industry. 2200 are in transport – that is 13.5 per cent of local businesses – and 490 are in manufacturing, at just around 3 per cent. Every one of these construction and building associated workers and businesses deserves a construction sector that is free from criminal infiltration, coercive behaviour and unsafe practices. They deserve an industry where jobs are allocated fairly, where safety is paramount and where wage entitlements are respected. People in my community expect government to act firmly against wrongdoing, especially when public money is involved. They expect transparency, they expect accountability and they expect that if someone is doing the wrong thing the law will deal with them, and this bill delivers on those expectations.

As one of the fastest growing states in Australia, Victoria depends on a strong, robust and ethical construction industry. We are building more infrastructure than at any other time in our history, with major roads, new hospitals, rail upgrades, new schools and thousands of new homes. The construction boom must be built on integrity and not on intimidation. Unlike some of those opposite, who like to talk tough on crime while voting down reforms that actually tackle it, Labor’s approach is very clear. We identify the problem, we investigate it, we consult widely and then we legislate decisively, and that is what this bill does exactly. The opposition have no credibility when it comes to talking about integrity and governance. This is a Liberal Party that is at internal war with itself. It is a Liberal Party taking itself to the Federal Court. It is a Liberal Party that has taken itself now to the Supreme Court. It is a Liberal Party that is tearing itself apart in Canberra, and they have no credibility in this space at all. If they cannot govern themselves, how can they govern the rest of Victoria?

The Labor Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025 strengthens the integrity of the labour hire sector, enhances transparency, targets criminal conduct and protects workers and whistleblowers. It gives regulators the powers they need. It holds back bad actors. It restores confidence for workers and employers doing the right thing, and it helps ensure that every dollar of public infrastructure spending is delivered by an industry held to its highest standards of conduct. More importantly, it helps protect the safety, dignity and rights of hundreds of thousands of people who work across Victoria’s construction sector. This is practical reform, strong reform and necessary reform, and I commend the bill to the house.

 Chris CREWTHER (Mornington) (18:35): I rise this evening to speak on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. Firstly, I do commend the principle behind better regulation of labour hire licensing arrangements in our state. The Parliament has a clear responsibility to ensure that work arrangements are fair, lawful and transparent, especially for those who may be vulnerable or subject to exploitative practices. I am particularly passionate about combating modern slavery and protecting workers from exploitation in all forms. But of course any regulation needs to be done right and to get the balance right as well.

Many years ago, from 2013 to 2015, I was the CEO of Mildura Development Corporation in the north-west of Victoria, and I came across and heard many, many stories in the media about modern slavery and labour exploitation in horticulture but also in many other industries. This was also a concern for many farmers in the region. This is not just an issue of human rights but also about competition. Most farmers and labour hire contractors do the right thing, but those who are doing the right thing cannot compete fairly on price with those doing the wrong thing, particularly those who might be selling to Woolworths and Coles and others who often do look at price. Many busy farmers, particularly during picking season or otherwise, do not want to have to go out of their way to ensure that someone they take on in terms of a labour hire contractor is getting everything right within their operations and supply chains as well. It was an issue that I felt was very important to deal with, and we did need to have better regulation across Australia and in Victoria.

In 2016, when I was a federal MP, I instigated and led the modern slavery inquiry in Australia as the chair of the Liberal government’s foreign affairs and aid subcommittee. In 2017 we put out a large number of recommendations, which included that we should have a modern slavery act in Australia. This was then introduced as an act in 2018 and came into force in 2019, which means that those like Woolworths and Coles who are buying products, say, from Mildura or elsewhere have not just to look at price but look at their own operations and supply chains to work on eliminating modern slavery practices and occurrences.

In addition, we made recommendations under recommendation 48 that there should be uniform national labour hire licensing. I note that our particular recommendation said that we should have the establishment of a uniform national labour hire licensing scheme consistent with a number of other recommendations in the past. One of these was a 2016 Victorian inquiry, which I note was led at the time by, in particular, Professor Anthony Forsyth for the Victorian government. It was an inquiry into labour hire, licensing and insecure work, and the recommendation under recommendation 13 was that Victoria advocate for a national sector-specific labour hire licensing scheme.

But what has happened since? Reflecting a lot of these conversations about modern slavery and labour hire licensing in conjunction with the inquiry I was leading and otherwise, Queensland and South Australia introduced labour hire licensing laws in 2017, Victoria in 2018 and the ACT in 2021. Regulation was needed, and it needed to be nationally consistent and it also needed to be done well, but in many regards it was not done well. It was not done consistently across jurisdictions, and it was not done in a uniform national way, as recommended in our inquiry. It has a lot of problems, particularly in border zones like Mildura and other places where you might be drawing labour for farmers or others from Victoria or New South Wales in a situation where, say, Victoria has labour licensing laws but New South Wales does not. Victoria’s laws were not necessarily written in such a way that they would stop modern slavery and those doing the wrong thing. They in many ways created regulatory burdens or did not do things well in terms of trying to help and encourage those farmers and labour hire contractors who were actually trying to do the right thing.

This bill seeks to amend the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2018 to strengthen the definition of labour hire services, sharpen the fit and proper person tests for licence-holders, enhance the powers of the Labour Hire Authority to investigate and monitor, and expand transparency around licensing decisions. We know that in industries such as construction, agriculture, security and others, labour hire providers and host businesses have sometimes used multi-tiered supply chains to evade obligations, leading to wage theft, misclassification, unsafe conditions and worker vulnerability. The government has stated that it will stamp out the rotten culture in parts of the construction sector, but we have seen many instances of that, particularly through the CFMEU and others over the last few years. This bill does also implement recommendations 3 to 6 of the Wilson review into construction industry misconduct, and it does strengthen a number of other areas as well.

While the intent of this bill is sound, there are several issues that have been raised by stakeholders. One is that the definition of labour hire may unintentionally capture recruiters, consultants or legitimate subcontractors, as there is no explicit carve-out. Also, the publication powers could allow naming of businesses under investigation without notice or review rights, creating risks of reputational damage. Also, the delegation powers are broad and lack conflict of interest safeguards, and the fit and proper test may treat minor administrative breaches the same as serious offences. The opposition supports the principle of protecting workers and stamping out exploitation, which is why we are not opposing this bill. But I do hope, particularly in the upper house, that there can be consideration of the introduction of and support for amendments to tackle some of these issues that I have raised.

As I have mentioned, we have a number of concerns. Our concerns include small business impact. Many employers, local employers as well, including family-run businesses in Mornington, Mount Martha, Mount Eliza, Mildura and elsewhere rely on casual labour or subcontractors to operate efficiently. Overly broad definitions or regulatory burdens may unintentionally penalise them. We also have concerns about the clarity of definitions. The term ‘labour hire services’ must be clearly defined to avoid capturing legitimate contracting arrangements and causing confusion for compliant businesses. We also need proper resourcing of enforcement. Strong laws require strong enforcement. There are many strong laws, not only in Victoria but in Australia and around the world, where if you do not have proper enforcement in place, the laws can almost mean nothing if they are not done well. If people know that they can actually get away with something, then they will do it more and more, and as I have seen in Mildura and elsewhere, you get back to the situation where farmers and labour hire contractors who are actually trying to do the right thing cannot compete fairly. And you have people whose human rights are abused, whether it is in a debt bondage situation where they may have their passports taken or where someone is abusing backpackers or Pacific Islanders or anyone who has come who is especially vulnerable to abuse here in Australia and may not have the language skills or knowledge of our local laws to be able to cope.

I note as well some opposition concerns around whistleblower protections. Workers must feel confident to report breaches without fear of detriment or retaliation, so we definitely need to get this balance right. We do support the government’s aim of raising standards, but we call for constructive amendments to ensure this legislation is fair, practical and delivers real protections, not unnecessary burdens, on farmers, labour hire contractors or others who are trying to do the right thing.

 Steve McGHIE (Melton) (18:44): I rise to contribute on the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. There have been quite a few speakers on this matter and on this bill, and I will go to a bit of the history first. The Victorian government commissioned the Wilson review back in July of 2024, with the government’s response to that back in December of last year accepting all of the recommendations either in full or in principle. The review found that most of the relevant interventions sit with the Commonwealth under its broad industrial relations powers under the Fair Work Act 2009 and the regulation-of-employee-association powers but that there are a number of actions that Victorian government agencies can take to enhance oversight and management to deter criminal and unlawful activity. The measures that our government is adopting aim to complement the Commonwealth reforms and the placement of the construction division of the CFMEU into administration. We passed anti-bikie laws in 2024, and that was to make it easier to prevent certain individuals from associating with each other.

The key objective of the bill is to give effect to the government’s commitment to implementing the Wilson review recommendations 3 to 6 by amending Victoria’s labour hire licensing laws. Those amendments will strengthen the fit and proper person test with respect to labour hire licensing, amend the definition of ‘labour hire provider’ to align more closely with industry practices and provide greater clarity, streamline the Labour Hire Authority’s information-gathering powers and allow the LHA greater scope to publish information with respect to licensing decisions. One of the proposals was, as I said earlier, replacing the current fit and proper person test with a new test which enables the LHA to consider a broader range of matters when assessing the suitability of an applicant for a labour hire licence, and that came out of recommendation 3. It also went to amending the definition of ‘provides labour hire services’ to give greater clarity about who is covered by the scheme, noting that the amendments to the regulations proposed in recommendation 4 will be considered following the preparation of the requisite regulatory impact statement, and providing the LHA with a broader notice-to-produce power to obtain relevant documentation and information, and that is really important. That came out of recommendation 5. It also clarifies the scope of existing publication powers and introduces a new power for the LHA to publish information about licensing decisions, and that was recommendation 6 – so recommendations 3 to 6.

It provides greater protection to all LHA staff as well as the commissioner in circumstances where they may have been dealing with matters and allegations arising out of the review. It could expand the list of laws that licence-holders and applicants must comply with to include laws relating to education, training, bankruptcy, competition, consumer protection and fair trading, corporate regulation and security interests in personal property. It also amends the Workforce Inspectorate Victoria Act 2020 to prohibit persons from causing or threatening to cause detriment to other persons for making a complaint or providing information to Workforce Inspectorate Victoria as part of their new complaints referral function. It has already been alluded to by previous speakers that people are being intimidated, harassed and threatened in some cases, and no-one in any workplace – no employee – should be put through that situation and be pressured in that situation. If they have an issue, they have a right to raise their issue. If they are not fairly treated, they have a right to raise that. That is their right within a workplace, and they need to be treated appropriately. The government is committed to supporting all of the recommendations of the review, as I said earlier, either in principle or in full. Again, that is what this bill is all about. There are many cases, as I said, of employees being intimidated, harassed and threatened, and there are many situations where it is necessary that, when people make a complaint and provide information to the workforce inspectorate, they be protected. But in many cases they are too scared to come forward, and many of them have been threatened, unfortunately.

There was a lot of consultation about this bill. The Department of Justice and Community Safety, Victoria Police, the Office of Public Prosecutions, the LHA and the workforce inspectorate were consulted during the development of this bill. Industrial Relations Victoria also undertook targeted consultation with employers, the construction industry, peak bodies and of course the unions, which is really important – making sure that unions were consulted and their members were well aware of what was happening. As I said, there was extensive consultation on these issues.

I did have some dealings with labour hire companies through my time as the secretary of the ambulance union. The ambulance service used labour hire in some cases for back-of-house operations. It was quite interesting in regard to whether you could obtain the relevant information on wages and conditions for those employees. It also put some of those employees in a very insecure position. They could not speak up, or they were scared to speak up, about their entitlements, and whether they were being paid the appropriate entitlements was another thing and whether we as a union could prosecute on that basis. But it was very difficult to deal with and very difficult for those employees to come forward. As I said, there are many industries, not just the construction industry, and I know some speakers have spoken about farming and things like that where labour hire companies are used. As I said, it is difficult at times to deal with some of the circumstances around employees that are employed by labour hire companies.

I will just make some short, brief comments about recommendation 5. It proposes providing the LHA with the power to request that a person provide information or documents that an inspector has a reasonable belief are necessary for monitoring or enforcing compliance with the act. Currently this power is broadly linked to an entry power which first must be exercised before making the request for the documents. The recommendation is implemented by the proposed amendments in this bill, and it specifies that the request should give the recipient the option to consent to providing the document or information in the first instance. That is an important component. And then recommendation 6, as I referred to earlier, proposes that the LHA be provided with expanded publication powers. It recommends that the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2018 be amended to empower the LHA to publish additional contextual information about suspensions and cancellations of licences on the register of licensed labour hire providers, and that is obviously to keep people aware of what we would probably say are companies that should not be in practice. This is a really important bill. It comes out of the Wilson review, and I commend the bill to the house.

 Cindy McLEISH (Eildon) (18:53): Let us be clear as to the reason why we are here with this bill that we have before us at the moment, the Labour Hire Legislation Amendment (Licensing) Bill 2025. It is here because some pretty dodgy stuff was happening on Victorian government construction projects. The government may or may not have known this; I suspect they had probably heard all of the stories. We had a bit of a blend here of organised crime and the CFMEU on government construction projects, and some of the things that were happening on these projects were intimidation, coercion and anti-competitive behaviour. It was exposed by the media, and many members in the chamber I am sure would be aware that the Age and 60 Minutes exposed a whole lot of this, and it was ugly. Once it was exposed, only then did the Premier act. I think there were rumours for quite some time; people had heard all sorts of stories. But then in the middle of last year the Premier said that the government would establish an independent review to consider the recommendations to strengthen the powers of the bodies who are engaged with or have oversight of construction companies and the like, and here we are today with the labour hire review.

The Wilson review was tabled 12 months ago, so the government have sat on this for 12 months and decided that they perhaps did not really need to do something. I am just going to comment for a moment. The Wilson review was indeed quite a broad review for what was a particularly acute issue, and surprisingly, the scope of works only related to public works. There were eight recommendations made, and of those recommendations the bill here seeks to address recommendations 3 to 6.

I, like many others, have organisations, companies and family-owned businesses in my electorate that rely on labour hire firms. In the horticultural industry particularly, whether that is in the vineyards or the horticulture where there are apples and cherries and different things, they rely on labour hire to come in and do particular work at a particular period of time. It is very, very useful. I know in other farms further away labour hire is also very valued. So we need to make sure that it is right.

The changes that were made by the government into labour hire a number of years ago I thought were a bit dodgy, but the opposition is not opposing the ones that we have before us at the moment. The purposes of this bill are to amend the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2018 to further provide for the meaning of labour hire services, provide for determining if a person is a fit and proper person and provide for the authority’s monitoring, investigation and enforcement powers. There are clauses around information sharing, subject matter for regulations, and as always there are some minor consequences.

But I just want to talk momentarily about the fit and proper person test, because we have had issues, as I have said, on these construction projects – the blending of the CFMEU and organised crime and outlaw motorcycle gangs as well. Interestingly, the bikies were banned. They are not allowed onto worksites, but we notice that they can still have a labour hire firm. I think the government probably should have another look at this, because they can still call the shots in a different way. The practices that we saw of intimidation and coercion particularly are troubling. I think that there is still scope for further work here to make sure that, if they are not allowed on worksites, the outlaw motorcycle gangs and the organised crime, they should not be able to have labour hire firms. More should be done to monitor this activity and to look at who is licensed in a better way. The fit and proper person test I do not think currently hits the mark.

We had several concerns that I know others have mentioned here very briefly: they are broadening the definition of labour hire and some of the expansion of the powers and procedural fairness. Interestingly, there is a lack of any element that addresses the CFMEU’s corrupt practices directly. There has been a lot about the CFMEU. Certainly on this side of the chamber we are acutely aware of the CFMEU links with the Labor Party and members in this place. There is no additional funding planned for some of the bodies, including Victoria Police, to service these new powers. With only one exception, there was not consultation with the industry association stakeholders. We asked this at the bill briefing as well – we are reasonably thorough in those bill briefings – and that is a little bit frustrating. There is certainly scope creep and unlimited discretionary power for the Labour Hire Authority.

If we think about the authorities that are in place and that they have been given particular powers – and I understand that sometimes it is a little bit fuzzy around the edges, that you have to allow a little bit of flexibility there – the new definitions focus on the character of the service provider rather than the structure of the business and the totality of the relationships between the provider and the other person. This gets back to some of the issues that I talked about just a moment ago. For the labour hire, the report on the number of workers placed by the applicant will result in too many not really labour hire businesses being captured in the labour hire net.

Business interrupted under sessional orders.