Regulator was ‘captured’ by CFMEU, industry figures believed
Updated ,first published
Construction industry figures believe Queensland government regulator Workplace Health and Safety has been compromised by the CFMEU and is doing its bidding, the state’s commission of inquiry into the union heard on a busy day.
David Balmer, regional director of Spanish multinational Acciona and president of the Queensland Major Contractors Association, made the comments at the Commonwealth Civil Courts in Brisbane’s CBD on Wednesday afternoon.
“The speculation was that the CFMEU was in control. [Workplace Health and Safety Queensland] “We were directing their efforts, resources and traffic,” he said.
“We viewed them as a captured regulator.
“If the CFMEU had a goal and an agenda that required the assistance of WHSQ then this would have happened… it was pretty unhealthy.”
The allegation that WHSQ was influenced by the union was raised many times during the investigation. heard in April The union had turned the regulator’s boss into a “call center operator”.
Earlier on Wednesday, a senior Department for Transport official said he was “horrified” during an alarming meeting with CFMEU leaders to discuss the impact of employment policies on projects.
Procurement chief Deanne Hawkswood described the meeting, which saw former CFMEU leaders Jade Ingham and Michael Ravbar seated at the end of a large table in the boardroom, as a “very tense environment”.
Union leaders cursed government officials, were told of an investigation, and displayed an attitude that was aggressive, arrogant, and dismissive of the department’s concerns.
Transport and Main Roads chief procurement officer Deanne Hawkswood oversaw the industry’s response to the state government’s union-established workplace authorization conditions, called Best Practice Industry Conditions (BPIC).
Hawkswood said it quickly became clear that the framework represented an “impossible policy” for transport infrastructure, as it was designed around the needs of the construction sector rather than the civil sector.
These concerns have been voiced across key state government portfolios, including the CFMEU as well as the Ministry of Housing and Works and the minister for transport.
Hawkswood said he and other senior TMR officials met with Ingham and Ravbar at union headquarters in May 2020 to discuss concerns about BPIC.
“We were there to talk about how we could approach implementation. [of BPIC] and what some of the barriers might be,” Hawkswood said.
“[Ravbar and Ingham] “They got pretty aggressive and said things like, ‘Don’t come in here and start telling us things you won’t do.'”
Hawkswood said he was in disbelief after hearing the language used against TMR managing director Neil Scales and deputy managing director Amanda Yates, who was also in attendance.
“I was scared as I watched how they treated our two most senior employees in the department,” he said.
“I wanted to say something, but I was too cowardly to say anything. I didn’t want to be targeted by them.”
Hawkswood said TMR raised concerns about how BPIC would affect transport projects as early as 2019 and raised potential issues with former transport minister Mark Bailey and former public works minister Mick de Brenni.
“We wanted to make sure they really understood the nuances of the transportation infrastructure program and what that meant. [BPIC] Hawkswood said the decision would have implications for the ministry.
“Our preference was for BPIC to remain only within the construction industry. They were more mature in industrial relations. [than] civic space.”
Hawkswood said former premier Annastacia Palaszczuk’s office expected minimum conditions to be implemented on transport projects as soon as possible and instructed TMR on the consultation process, including meeting with the CFMEU.
BPIC’s cost impact on major projects was among other evidence discussed, with Hawkswood telling the inquiry early modeling showed an increase of around 3.6 per cent.
By 2024, “real-life examples” showed costs rising by up to 25 percent.
Commission chairman Stuart Wood KC pressed Hawkswood on why it had taken TMR four-and-a-half years to show the true cost of BPIC, which had previously been described by Brenni as a “cost-neutral policy”.
“The industry could certainly have told you this when you presented the BPIC to them in December 2020. [that] this will increase the cost 20 [to] 25 percent. Seems like a long time to wait,” Wood said.
Hawkswood admitted that TMR’s modeling “undercounted” the true cost of BPIC.
“We thought this would only affect the labor component of the project, and long-term modeling has shown that it actually affects much more than construction costs.”
Speaking in the afternoon, Balmer said the construction industry did not see the need for BPIC reforms and that there was minimal consultation when they were introduced.
Acciona had estimated they would contribute between $25 million and $54 million to the Coomera Connector phase one road project.
Total costs increased by $80 million. But this was at least partly due to increased coverage.
Balmer said the only official explanation given to him about why the reforms were necessary was at an industry engagement forum, where Sharon Bailey, deputy director general of the department of public works, reportedly told the crowd it would prevent “wage theft”.
“Everyone had a very emotional reaction to this… I certainly don’t see that as a reasonable reaction, not even close,” he said.
Start your day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
