Watchdog’s poll talks with building chiefs

Coalition-appointed building watchdog Stephen McBurney held a ‘strategic’ meeting with Master Builders discussing the federal election ahead of the poll, new documents reveal.

Commissioner of the Australian Building and Construction Commission Stephen McBurney knew his position would be abolished if federal Labor was elected.

Coalition-appointed building watchdog Stephen McBurney held a “strategic” meeting with the Master Builders that discussed the federal election ahead of the May 21 poll, new documents reveal, sparking calls by Industrial Relations Minister Tony Burke for an explanation and union demands for him to resign.

Documents obtained under Freedom of Information show Mr McBurney, who knew his position would be abolished if federal Labor was elected, met with senior MBA members, including chief executive Denita Wawn, in Canberra on February 17.

The documents released by the Australian Building and Construction Commission following a FoI request by the construction union, state they discussed “key upcoming issues” including the “forthcoming election” and the ”implications for the building code”, which Labor had promised to scrap if it won power.

Representatives of the ABCC and the Master Builders also met in Tasmania in April, where they discussed the “MBA election campaign” in support of retaining the ABCC and “how it would be similar to the last election running with the union bullying theme”.

Master Builders made prominent interventions in the run-up to the election, funding a national advertising campaign against Labor’s plan to scrap the ABCC, and ­labelling it an act of “economic self-harm”. It released research claiming the ABCC’s abolition would deliver a $50bn hit to the economy.

Chief executive of Master Builders Denita Wawn.

Mr Burke told The Weekend Australian he was “alarmed” by the revelations in the documents and the ABCC needed to explain what was discussed at the meetings.

“I expect very high standards from people who are placed in official public duties using taxpayers’ money,” Mr Burke said.

“And so, quite separate from the view I have of the ABCC as an organisation, and whether it should have ever existed, this goes to the core of taxpayers’ money being used appropriately or inappropriately and people have an absolute right to know what was said and why those meetings occurred.”

Mr McBurney said the February meeting with the Masters Builders was a “stakeholder engagement meeting”.

He said the “forthcoming election” bullet point in the document related to him telling stakeholders the election was due by May; that the ABCC would enter caretaker mode when the election was called, and that compliance activities would continue largely unaffected.

He said the ABCC was a “very transparent agency”. “I have given a full explanation of this to Senate estimates. I’m prepared to give an explanation to my responsible minister,” he said. “That is his prerogative and I stand by our actions.”

According to an ABCC record of the April 6 meeting, the MBA representative told the regulator the industry group’s campaign “would also support the keeping of the ABCC and they would be taking an economic/productivity argument with this approach”.

The ABCC assistant director, whose name was redacted, emailed the Master Builders providing links of CFMEU social media posts attacking the regulator.

Master Builders sent back copies of its election ads in support of the ABCC and the Coalition retaining the agency, including one that said “vote for the party with the best plan for economic recovery, that will back builders and tradies”.

CFMEU construction division national secretary Dave Noonan said it was “extraordinary that a taxpayer-funded regulator, which pretends to be apolitical, would be engaging in pre-election discussions with an industry lobby group so closely aligned with the Liberal Party”.

“We saw the ABCC engaging in a steady drip feed of media ­releases in the run-up to the federal election which in my view were calculated to support the Liberal Party, and I think ­McBurney should resign,” Mr Noonan said.

“At the very least, it’s regulatory capture. At worst, it’s political partisanship from someone holding a statutory office with very serious and significant powers.”

The ABCC record of the ­February 17 meeting referred to the research undertaken by the Master Builders where the ABCC and the code were the “subject of questions”.

“MBA happy to share feedback for ABCC on these two issues,” it said

In a statement, Master Builders said at a regular stakeholder meeting with the ABCC in late 2021 it told the regulator that it commissioned Ernst and Young to conduct research into the economic consequences of scrapping the watchdog, including a survey of contractors.

At their February meeting, Mr McBurney said, the agency had been contacted by contractors about the survey, asking if he was aware of it and whether it was “legitimate”.

“At this time, Master Builders advised the ABCC that we would use the results of the survey to support our campaign to keep the construction watchdog at the forthcoming election.

“That was the extent of discussion of Master Builders’ public ­advocacy.

“There was no discussion of the details of our advocacy campaign and whether or not it would comprise advertising.”