Michael Sukkar MP

Matter of Public Importance: The Government’s weak response to the CFMEU driving up the cost of housing

Not that you would know it from question time last week, but nobody questions the fact that the actions of the CFMEU over a long period of time have driven up construction costs in this country, including in the residential housing industry. What does that mean for everyday Australians? It means that, for a young Australian couple or individual looking to buy their first home, the bar to getting into that first home is higher and harder because of the actions of the CFMEU.

I’d say that that was what we expected to be well understood on both sides of the chamber until last week, when the hapless new housing minister, who has failed her way into the housing portfolio, made a quite extraordinary claim at the dispatch box. The housing minister claimed—and this is novel; I’ve never seen anyone argue this, let alone a minister or even a member of the Labor Party—that there were experts out there who believed that the CFMEU does not drive up construction costs. I thought that was a very interesting throwaway line. So, on a number of occasions, I gave the minister an opportunity to name who those experts were. I asked her on multiple occasions whether she was willing to illuminate us as to who those experts were that claimed that the CFMEU has no impact—none whatsoever—on housing costs in this country. It was a pretty cringeworthy effort, and I saw members opposite putting their heads down as the minister filibustered and weaved and couldn’t answer the question, of course, because we know that there are no experts that claim that the CFMEU doesn’t drive up construction costs.

The truth is that the CFMEU drives up costs by 30 per cent in this country. If you’re a first home buyer desperately scratching around for every single dollar so you can put it into a deposit to get into your first home, imagine what a 30 per cent reduction in the cost of that home would do. Imagine the difference it would make for that young couple or individual trying to buy a home in this country. The truth is that every single member of the government is complicit with that tax on first home buyers. It’s a 30 per cent Labor tax on first home buyers. Let’s be honest: this is the CFMEU’s business model. Their business model is funding and putting Labor members of parliament into this chamber. So they’re like puppets. They’ve got to do what the CFMEU ask. Every single one of them has benefited from the millions of dollars kicked into their campaign coffers every single election. It’s just like the famous Bill Hunter line in Muriel’s Wedding—Deidre Chambers! There’s bad behaviour in the CFMEU. I’m seeing the acting that’s going on on that side of the chamber. Their feigning ignorance as to the costs that are imposed on Australians has, I think, been one of the more shameful episodes for this government.

There’s been independent modelling undertaken. We talk about 30 per cent. We have people in the gallery today. Australians are listening in. We talk about a 30 per cent increase to construction costs and what that will do for first home buyers. The Queensland Economic Advocacy Solutions, which was commissioned by Master Builders Queensland, did some work on what it practically means. What does this unholy alliance between the thuggish CFMEU and the Labor Party, the people that they put into this parliament, do to first home buyers in this country? The truth is, according to this modelling, for a one-bedroom apartment in Queensland, the CFMEU tax imposed by the Labor Party on first home buyers is $128,543. Every single member of the government is happy to impose that $128,000 tax on first home buyers because it means more money into their coffers each election, with more thugs on their polling booths handing out their how-to-vote cards. That’s what they are willing to do. For a two-bedroom apartment in Queensland, what does Labor’s CFMEU tax on first home buyers amount to? It’s $257,086. I know there’s theatre in this place and I know that I’m having a go at the government here, but does anyone on the government benches have a conscience? First home buyers should not be bearing that additional tax. Surely every decent person in this chamber wants more first home buyers to get into the market?

We know the deposit hurdle is one of the hardest parts of getting into a home. I’m sure many people in this place have experienced the same thing. You decide: ‘I want to buy a home. This is the amount I think I’m going to have to save before I can go to the bank and get finance and buy something.’ Often by the time you’ve saved that amount, the market has moved, house prices have increased, construction costs have increased and what you thought was going to be your deposit is short. One of the reasons that deposit is short and one of the reasons it’s even shorter than it should be is the Labor-CFMEU tax imposed on first home buyers around this country.

There are howls of protest from those opposite when I refer to the fact that they are just part of the CFMEU business model—shake down employers for money, make first home buyers pay more for their homes, kick money into the coffers of the Labor Party and—heck!—actually pre-select the candidates with their votes on the floor of their state conference. What does that get you? What it gets you is this: one of the first items of business of this government was removing the ABCC. It was No. 1 on John Setka’s hit list. John Setka had his wish list—’Here are the top 10 things you need to do.’ Labor has been busily going about it in a studious fashion, crossing those things off. First on the list was the ABCC. Ernst and Young conducted a whole-of-economy modelling exercise to look at the impacts of abolishing the ABCC. For those who don’t know what the Australian Building and Construction Commission did, it was the cop on the beat to try and deal with the thugs in the CFMEU—the bikies, the criminals and the Labor Party members who cavort with them—and get them under control.

So what did this government do? What did every member who is now interjecting do? They voted to abolish the ABCC. They did this. It reduced worker productivity by 9.3 per cent, a total economic loss of $47.5 billion. It cost 4,000 jobs and contributed to that CFMEU Labor tax on first home buyers that I’ve just referred to.

It’s quite shameful that this government would continue to run protection. It’s even worse that it’s a new minister. It’s a minister who, quite frankly, failed so badly in the Home Affairs portfolio that she was moved. As I’ve said repeatedly, housing is far too important to Australians to treat the portfolio as a dumping ground for a failed minister. It only took us one day of question time to see why the issues with housing are likely to get worse, not better, under her stewardship. She couldn’t even level with the Australian people that the CFMEU has increased construction costs. To debase yourself so badly by claiming that the CFMEU has not impacted on residential house prices and construction costs is something that, quite frankly, I know, shocks many people on the other side of the House. Even the Daily Mail reported colleagues of the housing minister asking the question, ‘Is it too soon to have another reshuffle?’ The truth is that, if the minister cannot even agree that the CFMEU imposes a tax on first home buyers, what hope does this government have of addressing the housing crisis that their big Australia migration policy has created.

Click here for a PDF of the Hansard extract for this speech.