Thursday, 1 August 2024

Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (12:32): (603) My question is to the Minister for Housing. The 2026 Commonwealth Games village project, for which you were the minister responsible, had a secret preference clause for the CFMEU, ETU, PPTEU and Trades Hall. Minister, do government procurement arrangements for housing projects that you are responsible for contain a preference clause for the CFMEU, either specifically or alongside other unions?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:32): Thank you, Mr Davis, for that question. I am not quite sure about the extent to which your question, beginning as it did – relating to a previous portfolio – is relevant to the current general order. So what I will say is that the development of housing across two of the former village sites actually sits with precincts development work, and that is within the work of Minister –

David Davis: On a point of order, President, the question was not about other parts. It was about housing projects for which the minister is responsible.

The PRESIDENT: I am going to rule the point of order in. I think there may have been confusion from the minister. She was concerned at talking about a previous portfolio that she is no longer responsible for, but the question is around housing. Mr Davis, just the question – can you ask the question again?

David Davis: Minister, do government procurement arrangements for the housing projects for which you are responsible contain a preference clause for the CFMEU, either specifically or alongside other unions?

Harriet SHING: No.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (12:34): Minister, what checks or controls are in place to ensure that the CFMEU does not exploit its position on sites to threaten, bully, cajole or force members to join the CFMEU or be thrown off sites?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:35): I would be very happy to ask for the leave of the house to extend the time necessary for this question, but I suspect, Mr Davis, you are not going to quite like what it is that I have to say. It is really unfortunate that you do not understand the way in which right-of-entry provisions work, the way in which the federal law works, the way in which registered organisations regulation works and the way in which the coverage rules and eligibility rules apply. Mr Davis, should you wish to inform yourself at any point, to go into the detail of how it is that people are entitled to be represented by a union that has coverage of the work that they do, then please let me know, because the betrayal of your ignorance is, frankly, embarrassing.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, I did not ask for a general burst from the minister. I asked what checks and controls are in place, and she does not seem to be responding to what the checks and controls are.

The PRESIDENT: I think the minister was relevant to the question.

Harriet SHING: Thank you. Mr Davis, you did interrupt me, which shows yet again that perhaps you are not as interested in learning about the way in which right-of-entry and eligibility rules apply. Mr Davis, what I will say to you is that should you wish to become engaged in how it is that workplace relations operate to the extent that people are entitled to be represented by a union that has coverage of the work that they do, please just let me know.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, again, this is a serious question, and the response did not deal with the checks and balances and protections. It actually did not mention those, and it did not engage with them. It offered a briefing of some type, but that is a different thing from actually answering the question.

The PRESIDENT: I believe the minister was relevant. But, Mr Davis, I can commit to you that as it was pretty hard to hear, I am happy to review what was said and take up your point of order.