ADJOURNMENT
Senator KOVACIC (New South Wales) (19:34): I'm rising to speak about the ongoing corruption in the CFMEU and the call from the coalition for there to be a Senate inquiry into the administration of the CFMEU. There are a couple of points I want to make based on some comments in this chamber today, and I think they are really important. Some of the comments from the other side suggested that this is an ideological fight or an ideological battle on our side.
It is not. This is about ensuring that corrupt and criminal conduct has no place in organisations in our country. The CFMEU is a powerful, powerful union.
Delegates of the CFMEU sit on the national executive of the Australian Labor Party. They sit at the same decision-making table as our prime minister. They influence the expenditure and investment into key building projects of the Australian super funds.
They are tied to each other. That's why it is so important that we can be assured that the administration of the CFMEU is being conducted as it should be. If there are no problems there, if there is nothing to be seen there, then the minister, Minister Rishworth, the Prime Minister and the Albanese Labor government should not block this Senate inquiry.
That is very, very simple. This is not about coming after the rank-and-file membership of the CFMEU. There are good, hardworking construction workers who pay their dues to people who then spend that money and use those resources in a manner that is not acceptable.
That is what this is about. We are bringing this inquiry because we want the administrator to come to this parliament, explain what is going on and answer some basic questions. Tim Wilson, the shadow minister for industrial relations, put many of those questions to the administrator in a letter on 13 October.
He is yet to have any response to that letter. That was before the damning allegations from 60 Minutes on Sunday night, so this was before we heard from Charles Farrugia about the things that happened to him and his family—an individual storming into his home and frightening his wife and children. This is before we heard about gifts of jewellery, loans of cars, houses being built and land being acquired for the children of senior CFMEU members.
A senior member in particular, John Perkovic, was brought into the administration; he was elevated by the administrator. So we are not talking about things that happened before the administration. Many times today there have been comments around, 'Oh, 60 people were sacked by the administrator.' We're not talking about those people.
We are talking about the people that are still influencing the CFMEU today, after the administrator was placed in charge of the CFMEU. I'll read you some of the questions from Mr Wilson's letter to the administrator that we are still waiting for answers to, and they're not unreasonable questions. 'When did the meeting between Mr Zach Smith and Mr John Setka take place?
Did you personally approve this meeting in advance?' If he hadn't, there would have been even more significant issues for Mr Smith. However, we need to understand why the administrator would approve such a meeting when he indicated that there was no place for Mr Setka in the CFMEU. 'Are you aware of any other meetings between these two individuals in either a social or formal capacity?
If so, how many have there been?' In his role as administrator, he should know. 'What inquiries have you made of meetings between these two individuals or other like characters, including underworld figures, heads of bikie gangs, leaders of organised crime networks or former, disgraced CFMEU officials? Have any other CFMEU officials requested approval to meet with Mr Setka?
If so, did you approve these meetings?' These are not hard questions. They're completely relevant questions, and we expect answers to them.