Fair Work Amendment (Disqualified Officers) Bill 2026
Senator KOVACIC (New South Wales) (15:38): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill. Leave granted.
Senator KOVACIC: I table an explanatory memorandum and seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The speech read as follows— Thank you, President.
I rise to introduce the Fair Work Amendment (Disqualified Officers) Bill 2026. In 2024, the CFMEU was rightfully placed into administration. The level of corruption and crime that infiltrated the construction sector around Australia, and particularly in my home state of Victoria, became too evident to ignore any longer.
Under the current scheme, the administrator can take disciplinary action. He can expel members and he can disqualify officers. But he cannot do either for longer than five years, no matter how bad the behaviour or the offences committed.
A member expelled today can apply to re-join the union in just five years' time. That is the limit, and it applies no matter their offences. This is a provision that, to me, seems unjust in every way.
In practice, this gives some of the most well-known and worst documented characters in the CFMEU a path back into the ranks of the union, and it opens the moment that five year expiry kicks in. This is highly problematic, and deserving of reform today. Do not take my word for it that five years is not enough.
Take the administrator's. On 30 July, on the ABC's 7.30, Michael Crosby AM was asked why he was suspending John Setka's membership for only five years. His answer was that the rules limit him to a maximum of five years.
In his words, "That's as much as I can do." Pressed on the need for reform, Mr Crosby did not rule it out. That is the administrator this Parliament appointed, on national television, describing the limits of his own powers. He is not asking for a free hand.
He is telling us that where he judges conduct to warrant expulsion of more than five years, the law doesn't allow him to exercise that judgement. The Government may disagree with me about a great many things in this debate. It cannot disagree with its own administrator that he is working with one hand tied behind his back, a limit on his powers.
Those opposite will try to argue these powers are sufficient. But I want to put on record the extent of the bad behaviour that this administration is dealing with, the importance of which has only become more evident by the day. John Setka ran the Victorian branch of the CFMEU for twelve years.
His record is not a matter of rumour or partisan invention. It is a matter of public record. In 2019, he pleaded guilty to harassing a woman by phone.
In the same year, after reported comments disparaging the advocacy of Rosie Batty, his conduct became so indefensible that Anthony Albanese himself moved to expel him from the Labor Party. The Prime Minister couldn't stomach him. The law of this country still guarantees him a way back into the union movement.
Under his leadership, the Victorian branch of the CFMEU handed paid delegate and safety roles to members of outlaw motorcycle gangs and figures from organised crime. And when the Nine papers and 60 Minutes were about to put the evidence to him in July 2024, he would not answer the questions. Instead, he resigned, and expressed the hope that his departure would end the scrutiny of his union.
It did not, because the scrutiny was well deserved. Let me put on the record what accountability looks like when it is applied to this union. The former administrator, Mark Irving KC, asked a straightforward question.
He asked for information about how members' money had been spent. This is the reply he received, as set out in the Watson report. I warn the chamber that the language is confronting.
"Go f--- yourself, Irving." "You f-----g dogs have endangered my life with all your leaks to the media, and I will come into the office whenever I want. I'm not an ALP stooge like you two c---s." "One more leak you dogs and I'll fix it myself." That is what a request for basic financial transparency to members produced. Not an answer.
Abuse, and a threat. And it did not stop there. In November 2025, John Setka was arrested and charged over emails police allege he sent to a union administrator, following a notice to produce.
In February this year, he was arrested again. Charged over further messages to the administration, including one police say was sent on Christmas Day, and charged with committing an indictable offence while on bail. On 14 August, he was arrested for a third time.
Charged over social media posts featuring images of the former administrator Mark Irving and the assistant administrator Matt McGowan. A court bailed him on the condition that he stop posting intimidating or vulgar material about the people overseeing this union. Three arrests.
Three sets of charges. Every one of them arising, on the allegations before the courts, from correspondence aimed at the people this Parliament put in place to clean up the CFMEU. That is the environment the administrator is working in.
And this Parliament tells him the most he can do is five years. That is just a glimpse into the record of John Setka, and the type of person he is. That is the man the administrator examined when he imposed the toughest sanction available to him.
And that is the man to whom the current law guarantees a return date. Five years, and the door must be opened to him again. Not because anyone reasonable thinks it should be, but because the statute says so.
But this Bill is not about one man. Setka is the example everyone knows. But he is not the only one.
Let me turn more generally to the suite of allegations raised recently. The Queensland Commission of Inquiry into the CFMEU and Misconduct in the Construction Industry has received even more confronting evidence about the CFMEU. This includes evidence that the union maintained a "hitlist" of workplace inspectors it sought to force out of the state regulator, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, and evidence of bullying and intimidation so severe that one executive suffered a breakdown and attempted to take his own life.
Nine papers led by Nick McKenzie have also extensively reported about the conduct of CFMEU members and officials on Big Build sites. These include paid delegate and safety representative roles handed to members of outlaw motorcycle gangs, instances of women being physically abused and intimidated while the CFMEU protected men on government sites, and even Big Build operations being turned into drug distribution hubs for outlaw motorcycle gangs, with subcontractors continuing to pay underworld figures for access as recently as 2026.
Knowing this information, it is concerning that the Administrator's disciplinary powers remain subject to an arbitrary five-year limit. This Bill before us today removes the five-year statutory limit, giving the Administrator the option to impose any longer or indefinite period where warranted. This should not even have had to happen.
Individuals with behaviour so unacceptable should not be allowed to walk back into the union movement with open arms. The Bill also includes an amendment to the Act to clarify that a person is a "removed person" if they are "disqualified" under the Scheme. This avoids any doubt and makes clear our policy.
I would assume all of this Chamber would agree that persons disqualified under the Scheme should not be permitted to hold positions within registered organisations. The Bill also amends the Determination itself to remove the words "so long as the period is not greater than a period of 5 years". The Bill also includes a transitional provision allowing the Administrator to amend a disqualification decision made before commencement where the Administrator would have imposed a longer period had the five-year statutory limit not applied.
This ensures that persons who have already been subject to the maximum available sanction are not advantaged merely because their disciplinary decision was made before commencement of this Bill's amendments. We can fix this today. We can get it done.
The objective of this Bill should attract support from all sides of this chamber. I commend the Bill to the Senate. Senator KOVACIC: I seek leave to continue my remarks later.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.