Editorial: Shock CFMEU revelation that proves this probe is needed

A revelation on day one of the commission of inquiry into the CFMEU shows just how much the probe is justified, writes the editor.

The commission of inquiry into the CFMEU has begun in Brisbane.

There has only been one day of public hearings, yet sufficient evidence has already been provided to show why the commission of inquiry into Queensland’s militant construction union is necessary.

That the former leadership of the CFMEU considered its business model to be feared by everyone because they were willing to act outside the law – as the inquiry heard yesterday – is surely proof enough.

That is before you even consider the other examples provided in the evidence given by Geoffrey Watson SC – whose scathing review of the CFMEU in July was used by the state government as the reason to establish the inquiry.

Mr Watson told the inquiry he suspected former state CFMEU bosses Michael Ravbar and Jade Ingham were trying to emulate some of the tactics successfully used by the Victorian branch to take over control of building sites, including imposing their own delegates to contractors, and trying to intimidate its rival, the AWU.

And he said that while there were few instances of physical violence, the CFMEU was responsible for a barrage of abuse on job sites.

He said the union came to see itself as the organisation that ran industrial relations on construction sites.

Mr Ravbar’s lawyer Ruth O’Gorman indicated her client would challenge much of what Mr Watson alleged in his report and evidence. No doubt Mr Ingham will too. We will see. That is the process.

The important thing is that this inquiry is happening. Based on what we already know, it is necessary.

WONG CRACKS CHINA CODE

Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong seems to have finally found the right words to describe Australia’s often tense relationship with China.

In a speech to the Australian Institute of International Affairs on Monday, she argued Australia did not have to make a binary choice between protecting its sovereignty and maintaining our productive economic ties with China.

Instead, she sensibly said our relationship with China – both our biggest trading partner and potentially the biggest threat to our national security – was more complex than that. What Australia wanted, Senator Wong said, was a relationship that allowed us to
co-operate and engage with China, while prosecuting our national interests and building security and prosperity in our region.

Tellingly, and sensibly, Senator Wong did not downplay China’s capacity to disrupt our own best laid plans – although she did stop short of lumping Beijing in with Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. She said those nations would continue to sabotage and destabilise.

Diplomacy is all about finding the right words to get your point across without unnecessarily infuriating the other side. It is a challenge successive Australian governments have struggled with when it comes to our relationship with notoriously thin-skinned China.

Remember China’s outrage and imposition of costly export bans on Australian produce when then prime minister Scott Morrison suggested an investigation into the possibly Chinese origins of the Covid virus in 2020? Or the time China called us a giant kangaroo that serves as a dog to the US over some perceived slight or another? Or when it declared Australia was like chewing gum stuck to the bottom of China’s shoe?

In this week’s speech, Senator Wong appears to have successfully walked the fine line between defending Australia’s interests (her job) and not provoking China (her wish) – at least based on what we know publicly. There has been no backlash from Beijing about her commentary; yet.

But none of this is to say we are about to enter a period of plain sailing with China. Senator Wong, without offering examples, warned also that Australia’s strategic environment was not getting any easier and that with so much activity and contest, things may not go Australia’s way every time.

But all this does suggest that the federal government is sticking to its approach of no chest-thumping or demonising of China for the sake of a domestic audience.

In any event, ASIO boss Mike Burgess has been doing a pretty good job recently of playing the bad cop in this space, with his several public warnings of the growing threat to Australia from Chinese hackers. He has been doing such a good job that the Chinese have objected – publicly complaining that Mr Burgess had deliberately sowed division and confrontation and that ASIO had long been driven by ideology. (Let’s put aside any thoughts of pots and kettles and calling things black – at least they did not call him a giant kangaroo!)

It makes sense to use the ASIO boss and other intelligence sector heads to voice Australia’s concerns about Beijing’s illegal clandestine behaviour towards Australia. That tactic frees up our politicians to engage in the formal diplomatic game of finding just the right words to walk this very fine line.

Responsibility for election comment is taken by Chris Jones, corner of Mayne Rd & Campbell St, Bowen Hills, Qld 4006. Printed and published by NEWSQUEENSLAND (ACN 009 661 778). Contact details here