Union Needs Scrutiny

Corruption, or the purchase of special treatment from political parties, is the cancer of democracy.

Australia is by most measures one of the least corrupt countries.  In fact, the lack of corruption, and its adjunct -- the impartial rule of law -- is widely considered to be one of Australia's main competitive strengths.

A major potential avenue for corruption is the provision of donations to political parties.

Australia has made significant strides in improving both disclosure and scrutiny of political donations, and thereby reduced the potential for possible corruption.

All political donations of above $1500, whether paid directly to political parties or indirectly through third parties, are disclosed and accessible through the Australian Electoral Commission website.

Both the media and politicians scrutinise this data and are continually on the lookout for special treatment.

For example, the fact that the Manildra Group gave a large donation of just over $300,000 to the Liberal Party, and that this group also received special treatment from the Howard Government for its ethanol operation, was exposed and discussed at length.

There is, however, a relationship that has received little scrutiny:  the relationship between the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and the ALP.

The fact that the unions give money to the Labor Party is hardly controversial.  Moreover, the details of this funding are disclosed in detail on the AEC website.

The concern is that some unions, specifically the CFMEU, are demanding and receiving special treatment in exchange for political donations.

At its latest national conference, the ALP passed a resolution that committed a future federal ALP Government to give special preferences to "union friendly (read unionised, and union preferred) firms" in the issue of Government contracts.

This proposal was supported by -- and stands to benefit greatly -- the CFMEU (construction division), which in turn gave $460,000 to the ALP last year, making it the party's second largest donor.

This is not just a hypothetical policy either, as the Bracks Government has already put it into place in respect of some public works projects such as the MCG redevelopment.

Given that the policy violates all basic tendering rules -- increases costs, hinders competition and undermines job creation -- it cannot be rationalised as "in the public interest".

Indeed it looks and smells like "buying influence".  Or, in short, corruption.

ADVERTISEMENT