Chronology & Documents - Turnbull's gross negligence on CFMEU, overt corruption and Double-Dissolution Election
Monday, 15 July 2024
Chronology & documents - Turnbull's gross negligence on CFMEU and DD election we had to have
Tuesday, 12 July 2016
There is no quick way to list the recommendations for prosecutions for the CFMEU and CFMEU officials arising from the Trade Union Royal Commission.
And that's the point.
There was a vast range of material available to Turnbull to use in the election campaign.
He told us a campaign of record length was essential because of the CFMEU's lawlessness.
He made it official by putting it in writing to the Governor General on 21 March 2016.
The Governor General acted on that advice.
So why have you done nothing Prime Minister?
Why did you not mention this matter if it was of "great important for promoting jobs and growth"?
Why have you not taken us into your confidence about the "widespread and systemic criminality"?
Why no action when government officials, building contractors and decent workers have to put up with this at work?
19 months ago, Brian Parker was referred for prosecution after the TURC's damning interim report,
Here he is a few weeks ago during the election campaign, still in his job, still stirring up trouble and still bagging the Government.
And here.

The TURC referred Ravbar, Setka and Parker to these authorities for action.
Michael Ravbar - State Secretary QLD
-
(i) Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions in order that consideration may be given to whether:
-
(i) each of Michael Ravbar and Peter Close be charged with and prosecuted for extortion contrary to s 415 of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) (Chapter 8.7); and
-
(ii) each of Michael Ravbar and Peter Close be charged with and prosecuted for threats to cause detriment to another person contrary to s 359 of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) (Chapter 8.7);
-
-
(b) Australian Securities and Investments Commission in order that consideration may be given to whether:
-
(i) Michael Ravbar should be charged with and prosecuted for breaches of his duty as an officer contrary to s 184 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), and whether a civil penalty proceeding should be commenced and carried on against Michael Ravbar for contraventions of ss 180, 181 and 182 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Chapter 5.2); and
-
(ii) the exemptions granted to employee redundancy funds by ASIC Class Order CO 02/314 remain appropriate (Chapter 5.2);
(c) Fair Work Building Inspectorate in order that consideration may be given to whether proceedings should be commenced and carried on against:
-
(i) each of Michael Ravbar and Peter Close for coercion to the existence, exercise or refusal to exercise a workplace right contrary to s 343 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Chapter 8.7);
-
(ii) each of Michael Ravbar, Peter Close and Andrew Sutherland for taking adverse action against another person as a result of the existence, exercise or refusal to exercise a workplace right contrary to s 340 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Chapter 8.7);
John Setka - State Secretary Victoria
To the Fair Work Building and Construction
-
(iv) each of John Setka and Gerard Benstead for coercion by allocating duties to a particular person contrary to s 355 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Chapter 8.10);
(j) Victorian Director of Public Prosecutions in order that consideration may be given to whether:
-
(ii) John Setka and Shaun Reardon should be charged with and prosecuted for blackmail contrary to s 87 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) (Chapter 8.2);
Brian Sparkles Parker - State Secretary NSW
-
Brian Parker to the:
-
(a) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in order that consideration may be given to whether he should be charged with and prosecuted for intentionally giving false or misleading evidence contrary to s 6H of the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) (Volume 3, Chapter 7.1); and
-
(b) Australian Securities and Investments Commission in order that consideration may be given to whether to institute proceedings against him for breaches of his duties as an officer contrary to ss 182 and 183 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Volume 3, Chapter 7.1).
(a) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in order that consideration may be given to whether:
-
(i) the CFMEU should be charged with and prosecuted for cartel conduct contrary to ss 44ZZRF and 44ZZRG of the Competition Policy Reform (Victoria) Act 1995 (Vic) (Chapter 8.2);
-
(ii) Darren Greenfield should be charged with and prosecuted for using a carriage service to make a threat and/or to menace, harass or cause offence contrary to ss 474.15 and 474.17 of the Criminal Code (Cth) (Chapter 8.4); and
-
(iii) each of John Perkovic, Luke Collier, Rob Kera, Brian Parker and Michael Greenfield should be charged with and prosecuted for obstruction of a Commonwealth public official contrary to s 149.1 of the Criminal Code (Cth) (Chapter 8.9);
-
(l) Divisional Branch Management Committee of the New South Wales branch of the Construction and General Division of the CFMEU in order that consideration may be given to whether any action should be taken against Brian Parker under r 51 of the Rules for the Construction and General Division of the CFMEU to investigate whether Mr Parker:
-
(i) has engaged in gross misbehaviour;
-
(ii) has grossly neglected his duty;
-
(iii) has conversed in an abusive or derogatory manner towards any person;
-
(iv) has made statements which impugn the character and integrity of fellow officials; or
-
(v) should be removed from office (Chapter 8.4 and 8.5).
The CFMEU itself
-
Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union – New South Wales (CFMEU NSW) to the:
-
(a) New South Wales Minister for Innovation and Better Regulation in order that consideration may be given to whether an inquiry should be conducted pursuant to Division 1 of Part 3 of the Charitable Fundraising Act 1991 (NSW) into all of the CFMEU NSW’s practices concerning charitable fundraising (Volume 3, Chapter 7.3); and
-
(b) Australian Securities and Investments Commission so that consideration may be given to whether to institute proceedings against it for carrying on a financial services business without a licence contrary to s 911A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Volume 3, Chapter 7.6).
-
That was only a sample of the total recommendations against the CFMEU.
But Turnbull did nothing towards pressing the case.
The CFMEU's officials were free to continue as they had been doing before the TURC exposed their racketeering and corruption.
Turnbull extended the hand of friendship to the CFMEU.
And what did he get in return for leaving the CFMEU alone?