Labor delays John Setka expulsion hearing

Labor grants John Setka extra time to prepare his argument against being expelled.

CFMEU Secretary John Setka leaves the Melbourne Magistrate court with his wife Emma Walters last week. Picture: David Crosling

The Australian Labor Party has granted controversial union figure John Setka an extra 10 days to prepare his argument against being expelled by the party.

The secretary of the Victorian construction division of the Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union has written to the party questioning its power to expel him.

Anthony Albanese said the party had agreed to extend his hearing until July 15.

BREAKING: John Setka has written to the Labor Party executive requesting more time to present his case. I understand that it will be delayed by at least a few weeks beyond July 5 ⁦@SkyNewsAust⁩ pic.twitter.com/fd50WX5cnk

— Laura Jayes (@ljayes) June 30, 2019

“He wrote to the national secretary of the party on Friday asking for additional time to consider his case,’’ Mr Albanese said. “The fact he was tied up in dealing with the matters that were before the courts last week he says that he hasn’t had enough time to prepare his submission to the ALP National Executive.

“I don’t want to get tied up with any technicalities with regard to this. So the national executive committee have agreed to give Mr Setka extra time in terms of preparing his case and argument before the national executive.

“We will have an ordinary meeting this Friday, July 5th. We will give Mr Setka an extra 10 days to prepare his submission. So we will have a separate meeting via teleconference, as provided by the ALP rules, on July 15.”

Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Kym Smith

In his letter to ALP national secretary Noah Carroll, Mr Setka said he did not accept Mr Albanese’s claim he has caused reputational damage to the party.

“In your correspondence, you required me to provide material by close of business on 3 July 2019. I cannot do so, because there are a number of matters about which I need more detail. Without that further information, I cannot properly and fairly prepare a response,” Mr Setka wrote.

“Without proper answers to (my) questions, it’s wrong to force me to respond to such unclear allegations, and under a process that is completely unclear.”