This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Government & democracy
The bill would bring back the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. as a dedicated building industry regulator with stronger powers to investigate breaches and enforce the law.
The recent abolition of the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. left the building industry without the strong regulatory oversight the bill says had been dismantled. The bill responds by re-establishing the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. and expanding its powers to investigate breaches, ban unlawful picketing and cover more building-related work.
Supporters of the bill argued that after years of court penalties and repeated allegations of unlawful conduct in the construction sector, the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. left the industry without a dedicated regulator even as claims about higher infrastructure and housing costs continued. The bill was introduced in August 2024 to restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore., extend its reach and add stronger powers against unlawful picketing and non-compliance, but it did not pass and lapsed when Parliament was dissolved in March 2025.
The main case against the bill is that bringing back the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. would mainly target unions and worker organising, while doing little to cut costs or fix genuine integrity problems in construction. That criticism came from Labor speakers in debate, who argued it would revive a politicised regulator, weaken worker voice and distract from issues like wage theft and site safety.
Peter Dutton MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Liberal Party, LNP, Nationals.
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
221 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
The bill would bring back the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. as a dedicated building industry regulator with stronger powers to investigate breaches and enforce the law.
The bill would widen the rules to cover transport and supply work for building sites, but it would not cover making the goods themselves.
The bill would apply these building industry rules to offshore construction on resource platforms and some ships operating to or from Australian ports.
The bill would ban unlawful pickets that block or intimidate access to building sites, adding a building-specific ban that earlier laws did not have.
The bill would let the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner force people to give information, hand over documents or attend questioning in investigations, with Ombudsman oversight of that power.
The Coalition's 2024 Bill seeks to reverse these trends by re-establishing the ABCC with the strong powers it previously held under the BCII Act. Like the BCII Act, this Bill includes provisions that target unlawful actions and coercion, restoring higher penalties for contraventions.Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) explanatory memorandum
Paragraph (e) provides that building work includes the transporting or supplying of goods to be used in work covered by paragraph (a), (b), (c) or (d) to sites (including any resource platform) where that work is being or may be performed is building work. This provision was not part of any predecessor Acts, and has been included in the Bill to ensure that the supply and transport of building goods to be used for building work fall within the scope of the Act. It is not intended to pick up the manufacture of those goods.Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) explanatory memorandum
This clause provides that this Bill extends to or in relation to any resources platform and certain ships in the EEZ or in the waters above the continental shelf. This is an additional provision that was not included in the predecessor BCII Act. It is included to ensure that the Act extends to building work carried out in the EEZ and waters above the continental shelf e.g. on resource platforms.Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) explanatory memorandum
This clause provides that a person must not organise or engage in an unlawful picket. Unlawful pickets were not a feature of any of the predecessor Acts and has been included in this Bill to address the disruptions to the building industry caused by picketing.Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) explanatory memorandum
An additional level of oversight of the examination notice regime is provided for by the oversight of the Commonwealth Ombudsman. When the ABC Commissioner issues an examination notice, he or she is also required to notify the Commonwealth Ombudsman that the examination notice has been issued and provide the Ombudsman with a copy of the examination notice. As soon as practicable after the examination of a person takes place, the Commissioner must provide the Commonwealth Ombudsman with a report on the examination, a video recording of the examination and transcript of the examination. The Commonwealth Ombudsman is required to review the exercise of powers in relation to examination notices and provide a report to Parliament as soon as practicable after the end of each financial year about the examinations conducted during that year.Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) explanatory memorandum
Context
Supporters of the bill argued that after years of court penalties and repeated allegations of unlawful conduct in the construction sector, the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. left the industry without a dedicated regulator even as claims about higher infrastructure and housing costs continued. The bill was introduced in August 2024 to restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore., extend its reach and add stronger powers against unlawful picketing and non-compliance, but it did not pass and lapsed when Parliament was dissolved in March 2025.
Court penalties and legal breaches in the construction sector build over time
The bill's supporters said that since 2003 the CFMEUThe Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, repeatedly cited by supporters as the reason a stronger industry watchdog was needed. and its officials had broken workplace laws more than 2,600 times and been penalised by courts more than $24 million, forming the case for a tougher industry regulator.
Hansard ↗Coalition introduces bill to restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore.
The bill was introduced in the House with a case that abolishing the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. had removed a dedicated cop on the beat for the building industry.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Senate debate links CFMEUThe Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, repeatedly cited by supporters as the reason a stronger industry watchdog was needed. allegations to higher public building costs
During Senate debate, supporters argued that bullying, intimidation and disruption on building sites had pushed up the cost of publicly funded infrastructure by as much as 30 per cent.
Hansard ↗Supporters widen the case to housing, productivity and project failures
Later debate framed the bill as a response not only to alleged lawlessness but also to falling productivity, construction company collapses and rising housing and infrastructure costs.
Hansard ↗Bill lapses when Parliament is dissolved
The proposal did not complete its parliamentary passage and fell away at dissolution, leaving the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. restoration and new enforcement powers unmade.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Considered by scrutiny committee (11/09/2024): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 11 of 2024
Considered by committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against the bill is that bringing back the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. would mainly target unions and worker organising, while doing little to cut costs or fix genuine integrity problems in construction. That criticism came from Labor speakers in debate, who argued it would revive a politicised regulator, weaken worker voice and distract from issues like wage theft and site safety.
Recorded criticism was concentrated in Labor opposition to reviving the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore..
Targets unions more than real misconduct
Critics argued the bill would restore a regulator aimed mainly at unions and workers rather than at the most serious wrongdoing in the industry, so it was framed as an industrial relations attack dressed up as an integrity measure.
Could weaken worker voice and miss bigger workplace problems
Opponents said reviving the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. risked taking the industry back to a period of weaker worker representation and poorer safety focus, while public resources were spent chasing minor industrial matters instead of wage theft and other serious workplace harms.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dutton supports the bill and says it is needed to restore law and order in the building sector, bring down costs, and improve affordability for construction and housing.
Read in Hansard ↗Tony Sheldon opposes the bill, arguing it would bring back the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. and drag the construction industry back to the bad old days of weaker worker voice and more danger on worksites.
Read in Hansard ↗Michaelia Cash supports the bill and says it is needed to restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. and stop union veto and unlawful conduct from pushing up building costs.
Read in Hansard ↗Canavan supports the bill and says the coalition should restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. because it would rein in CFMEUThe Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, repeatedly cited by supporters as the reason a stronger industry watchdog was needed. criminality, cut construction costs, and help solve the housing shortage.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
2 speakers · 2 oppose
“Now, we're taking care of the issues that we see as being important, that this Senate has supported, regarding making sure integrity is brought back into this industry. But put this bill they're putting forward into the dustbin. This is simply about going back to the bad old days. They just can't wait: 'Let's bring back the seventies!' 'Let's see the death rates increase!' 'Let's have less worker voice!' 'Let's let good employers rot!'— (Time expired)”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to, not surprisingly, speak in strong opposition to this so-called restoring integrity bill. The Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) Bill 2024 (No. 2) represents a significant step, you might even say a leap, backwards. It seeks to revive a discredited, politically motivated agenda that we have seen play out over many, many years.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
10 speakers · 11 contributions · 9 support · 1 unclear
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michaelia Cash on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Michaelia Cash supports the bill and says it is needed to restore the ABCCThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. and stop union veto and unlawful conduct from pushing up building costs. She argues the watchdog is necessary to improve productivity, protect workers and businesses, and make the industry comply with the law.
“I urge those opposite to see the error of their ways and support this important legislation.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Michaelia Cash supports the bill and says it is needed to restore the Australian Building and Construction CommissionThe Australian Building and Construction Commission, the specialist building-industry watchdog the bill sought to restore. so the government can crack down on CFMEUThe Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, repeatedly cited by supporters as the reason a stronger industry watchdog was needed. bullying, intimidation and alleged corruption on building sites. She argues that stronger enforcement is necessary to stop taxpayers paying inflated costs for public infrastructure.
“But what does the bill do today? We, as a coalition, are moving to reintroduce the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which, even in its previous form, former Labor Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard understood needed to be in place. In other words, the behaviour of the CFMEU in the construction industry was so bad that even former Labor governments recognised that there was a need for a building watchdog. We want to restore the Australian Building and Construction Commission's powers to enforce workplace laws in the building and construction industry.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“That's why this bill is so important. This bill is important so that that story never has to get retold; this bill is important so that people can afford houses; and this bill is important so that you get the infrastructure you need, the government can spend money on better things and we can all move on.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill before the Senate would ban the Cbus organisation from accessing taxpayer funds through the government's Housing Australia Future Fund. The reason that measure has been put forward by the coalition is we do not regard it as appropriate that the CFMEU should be allowed to use it surrogates, the Cbus super fund, to access taxpayer funds. That is a reasonably unremarkable concept—that taxpayer funds should be shielded from an organisation that has been found to be engaging in deeply corrupt activities.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is about restoring integrity on construction workplaces—worksites that, as Senator Sheldon was saying, are very dangerous. Obviously the environment of these construction sites requires safety and requires having measures in place to ensure that they do operate safely. But these workplaces have also had a history of involvement of a militant union, a corrupt union, that has been taking advantage of its workers and not properly representing them in the way they ought to—in a lawful, sound way. So this bill is about restoring that justice, restoring the proper operation and oversight of these workplaces to ensure that these workers are provided with protection and indeed that the Australian people can see the value of this, without the interference of unions, which would increase the costs of construction projects. This is important. It's a very good bill. It's a sound bill. It's a bill that ought to be, as I said, supported by everyone here in this place.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's with great pleasure that I rise as the shadow infrastructure minister to speak in support of the Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) Bill 2024, which was introduced by Senator Cash. This is an important piece of legislation that will restore the rule of law to the construction industry. It will help remove lawlessness, corruption and thuggery from our building sites. Importantly, this bill will help reduce the cost of building homes, roads, rail lines and other public infrastructure assets right across Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Once again, those opposite cry crocodile tears and say: 'You were in government. Do something about it.' We tried. We tried to strengthen the laws, and those opposite know this. We tried to strengthen the laws, and the Labor Party and the Greens blocked us at every turn. They did not want a tough cop on the beat, but they've got a chance to prove they're actually serious about this issue now. They have a chance to support this legislation, to recognise that this industry is one that does need special consideration in terms of the way it is policed and in the way it is oversighted by this parliament and the legal system as a whole.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We all have an interest in fixing this issue, and that is why this bill is the only genuine solution to the continued abuse, corruption, intimidation and misuse of market power in the construction sector. That is why I support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In this bill we seek to restore the law of order. We seek to make sure we can have proper pricing structures in our building sector. If we do that, people will have the capacity to afford a builder again.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The ABCC will bring back a restoration of integrity to this industry, which has been so lawless for such a long time.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Lapsed at dissolution
Lapsed at dissolution
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Considered by committee
Considered by scrutiny committee (11 Sept 2024): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 11 of 2024
APH bill page notes
