The allegations surrounding organised crime’s infiltration into the CFMEU have stirred up quite a uproar, though some may find the uproar pretentious.
The CFMEU, often accused of behaving like an organized crime outfit itself, has long evoked little surprise or feigned shock from certain corners of the Labor Party. Federal Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke’s recent announcement of independent administrators being appointed to oversee the union amid federal police investigations into corruption allegations has been met with vehement indignation. Burke condemned the reported misconduct within the CFMEU’s construction division as a betrayal of the union’s core duty to its members.
This sudden outcry from Burke prompts reflections on his tenure thus far. Critics recall how he spent his early years in office dismantling the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC), a move he championed to level the playing field for construction workers but which drew sharp criticism from opponents who viewed the ABCC as a necessary check against union excesses.
Now faced with allegations of intolerable conduct within the CFMEU, Burke’s tone has shifted dramatically, echoing sentiments reminiscent of Bob Hawke’s actions against the Builders Labourers Federation in 1986. The parallels draw attention to the cyclical nature of union governance and regulatory oversight.
However, claims of newfound shock at thuggery and corruption within the CFMEU strike many as disingenuous, given the historical entanglements between the union and the Labor Party. The CFMEU’s internal power struggles, epitomised by figures like John Setka and Aaron Cartledge, reflect broader tensions within the union movement, where ideological clashes often shape leadership changes.
As the CFMEU faces scrutiny and potential de-registration, questions linger about the integrity of union solidarity and political alliances, underscoring the complexities of union governance in contemporary Australia.
The government’s decision to delegate the appointment of administrators to the Fair Work Commission, rather than taking direct action itself, may reflect a strategic move to swiftly move past the CFMEU controversy.
Two weeks of continuous revelations have once again diverted attention from Labor’s post-July 1 focus on cost-of-living improvements, overshadowed by negative domestic stories (despite the ongoing drama in the United States). The initial distraction came with Labor Senator Fatima Payman’s resignation and speculation over potential electoral impacts in western Sydney from the “Muslim vote” amidst tax cuts. Subsequently, the focus shifted to union-related scandals.
Labor’s hope rests on its prompt response to the CFMEU issue, aiming for a quick resolution in the public eye, ensuring that voter attention moves on swiftly.
Recent allegations that numerous companies have been excluded from taxpayer-funded construction sites due to their lack of alignment with the CFMEU raise serious concerns. This situation inevitably prompts scrutiny of whether modern unions prioritise political and often criminal agendas over the well-being of their diligent members.
Perhaps it is high time unions look after their members and political parties serve our nation’s interests.
