Senator SCARR (Queensland—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (10:30): Can I just say before I start how much I was moved by the first contribution from our new senator, Senator Payman—not her first speech, but her first contribution—in this chamber. As someone who has worked extremely closely with our wonderful Australian Afghani community since the tragic fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban last year can I say to you that your presence here today is a testament to the wonderful contribution that community has made to Australia, and it is an extremely significant milestone that you are here today. I am sure your father, were he with us, would just be so proud of you, and rightly so. We gather here today in light of the last federal election campaign, and I must say at the outset that in my home state of Queensland the Liberal National Party holds 70 per cent of all the federal lower house seats. The Queensland Liberal National Party now holds approximately 40 per cent of all coalition seats held across Australia. So my home state of Queensland did not vote for change at the last federal election, and that needs to be recognised at the outset. Senator McKim: They voted for the Greens. Senator SCARR: They did not vote for change, Senator McKim. I would like to acknowledge the wonderful work that was done by a whole series of great Queenslanders to contribute to that result in my home state of Queensland. First, to the Liberal National Party grassroots members, you are the heart, the soul and the backbone of the Liberal National Party in Queensland, and none of us would be here—none of us would have the opportunity to make our contributions to this Senate—but for your efforts. So to each and every one of you I say thank you. I would also like to pay tribute to my colleagues Trevor Evans, Julian Simmonds and Amanda Stoker, who unfortunately lost their seats at the last federal election. They could not have worked harder for their constituencies and for the state of Queensland during the course of the last parliament. I congratulate them on their efforts and wish them all the best in their future endeavours. I would also like to congratulate all of the other unsuccessful Liberal National Party candidates in the state of Queensland. In my first speech in this place I recognised the special contribution, and I called them the heroes of Australian democracy, of those who stand for their party and stand for their beliefs in seats where there is little prospect of victory but every prospect of demonstrating the commitment to their values and participating in our democratic process. In particular I pay tribute to Sam Biggins, our wonderful candidate in the federal seat of Blair; Olivia Roberts, who has stood twice for the party in the difficult seat of Griffith; Bryce McDonald, who achieved an outstanding result in Kennedy in Far North Queensland; Vivian Lobo in the seat of Lilley; my dear friend Stephen Huang in the seat of Moreton; and Kyle McMillen, who arrived on the electoral landscape like a knight on a white charger at the eleventh hour, two minutes to midnight, after our candidate had pulled out of the race something like an hour before nominations closed. Kyle rode in on his white charger and did an absolutely fantastic job representing the party and its values in the seat of Oxley. I should also acknowledge that the member for Oxley, Milton Dick, MP—we cover the same patch in many respects—has had the honour of achieving the post of Speaker in the other place, and I am sure he will do an outstanding job in that regard. Lastly, Paul Darwen in the Treasurer's seat of Rankin, another seat where it is difficult for our side of politics to secure victory, again did a wonderful job. To the Senate candidates, in addition to Amanda Stoker, who were unsuccessful—Nicole Tobin, Andrew Cripps and Fiona Ward: thank you. Thank you so much. And to the new colleagues who come to this place—Henry Pike, representing the constituency of Bowman; Andrew Willcox, Dawson; and Colin Boyce, Flynn: you will all make outstanding contributions to this place, as your predecessors did. Having dealt with the preliminaries, I'd like to get straight into it and talk about the ABCC, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, and the outrageous, unlawful, recidivist behaviour of the CFMMEU. One of the first actions of the Albanese federal government was to gut the powers of the ABCC, but we saw no reference to the CFMMEU in the Governor-General's address to this place yesterday. In fact, when the industrial relations minister, Mr Tony Burke, put out his three-page press release called 'Restoring equal rights for construction workers' on his website, in three pages he could not bring himself to mention the recidivist, unlawful activities of the CFMMEU. The whole reason why the Australian Building and Construction Commission was established was the unlawful behaviour of the CFMMEU, and he couldn't bear to mention it once. I'll be listening very carefully to the contributions made by other senators in this place during this debate as to whether or not they've got the gumption— Senator Pratt: You never talk about the good work of the CFMMEU either! Senator SCARR: as to whether or not they've got the gumption, Senator Pratt—to talk about, head on, the recidivist behaviour of the CFMMEU. And it's not just me who says that. After the writs for the last election were issued, the High Court brought down a judgement, a unanimous judgement, in the case of Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Pattinson. This case involved the unlawful activity of the CFMMEU with respect to using unlawful measures to promote their business strategy of no-ticket no-start on construction sites across this country. And what did the highest court in our nation say? Not Senator Scarr, not someone from the coalition—certainly, don't wait for Tony Burke to refer to it in his media releases on the CFMMEU. It doesn't exist to him. It's the elephant in the room that doesn't exist. But what did our High Court say? Let me quote from paragraph 43. I'll be very interested to hear what the Greens have to say about this, as well, because I'm going to talk about an issue dealing with occupational health and safety and women on our website shortly. This is what the High Court said at paragraph 43—not a Liberal coalition senator; the High Court: … the Full Court's approach in this case is apt to undermine the primacy of deterrence as the objective of the civil penalty regime in the Act is amply demonstrated once regard is had to the failure of previous penalties to have any deterrent effect on the CFMMEU's repeated contraventions of s 349(1) of the Act— their repeated contraventions of section 349(1) of the act. What do those opposite say to that? It goes on: The circumstance that the CFMMEU has continued to breach s 349(1), steadfastly resistant— steadfastly resistant—the High Court's words, not mine— to previous attempts to enforce compliance by civil penalties fixed at less than the permitted maximum, is a compelling indication that the penalties previously imposed have not been taken seriously because they were insufficient to outweigh the benefits flowing unlawfully— this is our High Court— to the contravenor— the CFMMEU— from adherence to the "no ticket, no start" policy. To the contrary— our High Court's saying this— the CFMMEU's continuing defiance— continuing defiance, snubbing their nose at the rule of law of this country— … indicates that it regards the penalties previously imposed as— and I quote the High Court, Senator Pratt— "an acceptable cost of doing business". That's what our High Court said. Subsequently, in the election campaign the Hon. Justice Logan, in the case of Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (the Titan Cranes Case), referred to unlawful activity conducted by the CFMMEU in accordance with its standard business practices, as referred to by the High Court. This is what the Hon. Justice Logan said—not my words, not the words of an ideologically driven Liberal coalition senator, but the judge's words: The time when enough was enough in relation to compliance with the law by this union— by the CFMMEU— its immediate predecessor and, for that matter, others in history, and its officials— no doubt this refers to the BLF— has well and truly passed. That is what the Hon. Justice Logan said in this case. There is no mention of this case in Minister Burke's media release, put out on Sunday, and there will be no mention of this case in the speeches which we are going to hear about workplace health and safety on our construction worksites around Australia—absolutely none. It's the union that dare not speak its name. It is the union whose name they dare not speak: the CFMMEU. When they are found out in photographs with senior officials of the CFMMEU, they can't scamper quick enough in the other direction to say: 'I didn't know such and such was subject to all of these penalties and engaged in all this unlawful activity. I didn't know; he just turned up at the May Day party and was in the parade wearing a big CFMMEU T-shirt. I didn’t know the history of that member of the CFMMEU Michael Ravbar'—who sits around the National Executive of the Labor Party—'in terms of his unlawful activity. No, I don't know.' We will not hear the term 'CFMMEU' contributed in this debate from the Labor Party. I am absolutely certain of that, because you are embarrassed by them. You're embarrassed. It's your dirty little secret. You're trying to keep it secret from the Australian public, and it's pathetic—absolutely pathetic. What did we hear from the industrial relations minister, Tony Burke, in relation to the exercise of the rule of law with respect to these industrial relations powers? This is what Tony Burke said: 'We're going to move it to the state workplace health and safety agencies. They can look after this. There's no need for an ABCC.' I see senator Roberts is here, from my home state of Queensland. The issue we had in Queensland in 2019 is that the Together union, representing public servants in Queensland, had to take industrial action to protect their workplace health and safety inspectors who were members of the Together union from the CFMMEU. How ironic and how pathetic that the Together union—a public service union—had to take industrial action so that their own members—workplace health and safety inspectors—could not be forced to attend 17 construction sites around Queensland, because they were in fear of their own safety on those construction sites. Senator Pratt interjecting — Senator SCARR: That's a nice quip, Senator Pratt, but what's your answer to that going to be? Are you going to defend the CFMMEU? Workplace health and safety inspectors in Queensland had to take union action to protect themselves from the thuggery of the CFMMEU. What is your response to that, Senator Pratt? You don't have one, because there is no response. It's your dirty little secret. You want to keep it your dirty little secret and keep it secret from the Australian public. I can assure you of this, Madame Acting Deputy President, we will shine a bright light— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Walsh ): Senator McAllister, a point of order? Senator McAlli ster: In this chamber, it is not courteous to accuse other senators of failing to respond. Senator Scarr knows full well that, without the call, Senator Pratt may not respond to his speech which imputes a range of observations about Senator Pratt and her position on certain questions. I think you might ask Senator Scarr to cease harassing Senator Pratt in the way he is doing at the moment. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Scarr, I notice that you've only got 50 seconds remaining. If you could try to return to the Governor-General reply and improve your tone, that would be appreciated. Senator SCARR: Absolutely. It'll be interesting to see if Senator McAllister is actually interested in relation to the harassment that occurs on our construction sites in terms of the activities of the CFMMEU. I have spoken to construction site employees who have had the numberplates of their personal motor vehicles photographed by members of that union with a view to personally intimidating them and causing them great stress. That is harassment, Senator McAllister, not what I said in a rhetorical flourish with respect to Senator Pratt, and I don't appreciate the imputation. Please rest assured we will shine a bright light on the Labor Party's dirty secret and the role of the CFMMEU all the way to the next election.