Cash resists subpoena in AWU police raid case

The Registered Organisations Commission and the Fair Work Ombudsman have spent $614,000 contesting the AWU case.

Michaelia Cash at Parliament House in Canberra yesterday: ‘The person who has questions to answer is the former head of the AWU’ Picture: AAP

More than $610,000 in taxpayers’ funds have so far been spent by government agencies defending legal action brought by the Australian Workers’ Union over the controversial police raids on its offices by the Registered Organisations Commission.

As Jobs Minister Michaelia Cash said she would challenge a subpoena requiring her to give evidence in the court proceedings, Registered Organisations Commissioner Mark Bielecki revealed his agency has spent $434,646 paying lawyers to defend the case.

Lawyers for the Fair Work Ombudsman told a Senate estimates committee hearing yesterday the agency had spent $180,000 on external legal costs contesting a union subpoena.

The Federal Court yesterday issued subpoenas requiring Senator Cash to appear to give evidence on August 1.

Subpoenas were also issued against her former senior media adviser, David De Garis, who was forced to resign last year, another former adviser, Mark Lee, and ROC official Chris Enright.

AWU national secretary Daniel Walton said the union had “long believed last year’s raid, and the investigation itself, to be unlawful”.

“We think it’s vital the court is assisted by the evidence of witnesses who we believe are relevant to the issues in the case. That is why we sought subpoenas,’’ he said. “If we are to understand exactly what happened then we believe the testimony of these individuals is critical.”

But Senator Cash, who called a media conference after refusing to appear at estimates yesterday, said the subpoena was issued at the request of the AWU and was a stunt designed to protect Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, who formerly led the union.

She said she was not a party to the proceedings which were between the AWU and the commission and she would seek to have the subpoena set aside.

“The person who has questions to answer is the former head of the AWU, Bill Shorten,’’ she said.

“The AWU has refused to provide evidence that donations made when Bill Shorten was the national secretary were properly authorised. The fundamental question is: when Mr Shorten was secretary of the AWU, did he donate $100,000 of union members’ money to GetUp!, of which he was a director at the time, without proper approval of the union’s executive? Today is just another effort by the union movement to protect Bill Shorten.”

But Mr Walton said the donation was approved by the union’s national executive, was within party rules and was “above board”. He said details has been provided to the commission.

“The executive had a conversation at the time about supporting a new organisation that was going to pursue our members’ interests. We supported it then and we support it now,’’ Mr Walton said last year.

Senator Cash also denied any responsibility for a whiteboard being put up in front of her to shield her from the media in March.

“I had nothing to do with the whiteboard. Can I tell you, you think you were surprised? You should have seen the look on my face. I was the one who was surprised,” she said.