This bill became law on Jul 6th, 2026.
Work & employment
The bill would amend the Fair Work Act 2009The main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places. (Fair Work ActThe main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places.), the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009A law governing registered unions and employer organisations, amended here for related workplace administration changes. and the Independent Contractors Act 2006A law dealing with some disputes about contractor service contracts, relevant here because road transport contractors may move between this Act and Fair Work Act protections depending on income. (IC ActA law dealing with some disputes about contractor service contracts, relevant here because road transport contractors may move between this Act and Fair Work Act protections depending on income.), to improve the workplace relations framework.
Current workplace laws left inflexible processes in the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. and limited meaningful access to protections for road transport contractors. The bill amends workplace relations laws to streamline CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. procedures, set a separate road transport contractor income threshold, support bargaining, and update related consultative and reporting rules.
Australia’s workplace system already relied on the Fair Work ActThe main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places., the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. and newer supported bargaining and contractor protections, but practical strains had built up: a 2020 Federal Court decision changed how dismissal conferences worked, supported bargaining could require repeat authorisations, road transport contractors faced a poorly fitted income threshold, and the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers.’s caseload had reportedly risen 70 per cent in three years amid AI-assisted claims. The bill responded by giving the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. faster case-management tools, creating a road transport contractor threshold, easing supported bargaining processes and allowing Commonwealth procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. preferences for enterprise-agreement employers, before Parliament passed it and it received Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act. in July 2026.
The main criticism was that the bill bundled broadly supported Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. efficiency measures with procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. and grants rules critics said could favour employers with enterprise agreements, increase union leverage, shut out small businesses and raise taxpayer costs. Coalition MPs, several crossbenchers and public reporting focused their opposition on those procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. provisions, with some saying they would support the rest if that part were removed or split out.
Hon Amanda Rishworth MP introduced this bill. In the House final vote, support came from Labor, Greens, some crossbench members; opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, One Nation, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 06 July 2026
Final passage
Recorded final vote
2 counted final-passage votes were recorded.
Passage speed
33 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
The bill would amend the Fair Work Act 2009The main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places. (Fair Work ActThe main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places.), the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009A law governing registered unions and employer organisations, amended here for related workplace administration changes. and the Independent Contractors Act 2006A law dealing with some disputes about contractor service contracts, relevant here because road transport contractors may move between this Act and Fair Work Act protections depending on income. (IC ActA law dealing with some disputes about contractor service contracts, relevant here because road transport contractors may move between this Act and Fair Work Act protections depending on income.), to improve the workplace relations framework.
The Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No.
As a package, the amendments reflect the government’s commitment to provide a workplace relations framework which enables cooperative workplaces.
The bill would positively engage the rights to a fair hearing and an effective remedy by allowing a more appropriate income threshold to be set for road transport contractors.
The bill would allow the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. to make a vexatious proceeding orderAn order stopping a person who has made baseless or abusive applications from lodging more specified claims unless the Commission gives permission..
The Bill would amend the Fair Work Act 2009 (Fair Work Act), the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 and the Independent Contractors Act 2006 (IC Act), to improve the workplace relations framework.Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum
The Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No.Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum
As a package, the amendments reflect the government’s commitment to provide a workplace relations framework which enables cooperative workplaces.Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum
The Bill would positively engage the rights to a fair hearing and an effective remedy by allowing a more appropriate income threshold to be set for road transport contractors.Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum
The Bill would allow the Commission to make a vexatious proceeding order. That is, an order preventing a person who has had an application dismissed because it is frivolous, vexatious or has no reasonable prospects of success from making further specified applications without permission.Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia’s workplace system already relied on the Fair Work ActThe main Commonwealth law setting national workplace rules, which this bill changes in several places., the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. and newer supported bargaining and contractor protections, but practical strains had built up: a 2020 Federal Court decision changed how dismissal conferences worked, supported bargaining could require repeat authorisations, road transport contractors faced a poorly fitted income threshold, and the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers.’s caseload had reportedly risen 70 per cent in three years amid AI-assisted claims. The bill responded by giving the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. faster case-management tools, creating a road transport contractor threshold, easing supported bargaining processes and allowing Commonwealth procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. preferences for enterprise-agreement employers, before Parliament passed it and it received Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act. in July 2026.
Federal Court decision changes dismissal conference practice
The explanatory memorandum said the bill would restore the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers.’s earlier private and informal handling of dismissal disputes after Coles Supply Chain Pty Ltd v Milford altered that process.
Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) explanatory memorandum ↗Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. caseload rises sharply
Parliamentary debate said the CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers.’s caseload had grown by 70 per cent in three years, with Justice Hatcher attributing the surge principally to AI tools used by potential litigants.
Hansard ↗AFR reports AI-fuelled claims surge before introduction
The Australian Financial Review reported that the government planned to give the workplace umpire stronger powers to reject claims and manage an unsustainable rise in AI-driven unlawful dismissal applications.
Australian Financial Review ↗Hon Amanda Rishworth MP introduces the bill
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives with measures covering CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. procedures, road transport contractors, supported bargaining and Commonwealth procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. preferences.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary approval of the workplace relations changes.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Bill receives Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act.
Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act. turned the bill into an Act, allowing the new workplace relations measures to commence according to their commencement rules.
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
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 88 to 45.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
Recorded vote: 87 to 43.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
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 (25/06/2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2026
Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2026
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 32 to 25.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 31 to 25.
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Third reading agreed to :
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill bundled broadly supported Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. efficiency measures with procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. and grants rules critics said could favour employers with enterprise agreements, increase union leverage, shut out small businesses and raise taxpayer costs. Coalition MPs, several crossbenchers and public reporting focused their opposition on those procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. provisions, with some saying they would support the rest if that part were removed or split out.
Criticism mainly targeted the procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. provisions, not the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. process reforms.
Procurement could favour union-linked or enterprise agreement employers
Critics argued the Commonwealth could preference contractors with enterprise agreements, effectively steering public work towards union-backed arrangements and away from otherwise competitive firms.
Small business, competition and taxpayer costs
Opponents said the procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. changes could reduce competition for Commonwealth contracts, make it harder for small businesses to win work, and increase costs or delays on publicly funded projects.
Integrity and transparency risks
Crossbench critics said the procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. and grants provisions were opaque and corruption-sensitive because they left too much detail to ministers and could pressure businesses into particular industrial arrangements.
Bill should have been split
Several critics said the government had packaged acceptable Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. changes with unrelated and contested procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. measures, limiting scrutiny and forcing parliament to accept or reject the package as a whole.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Passed 87 to 43. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 31 to 25. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 88 to 45. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 32 to 25. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 32 to 24. Support came from Labor and Greens. Opposition came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House
Defeated 8 to 73. Support came from Centre Alliance. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a statement vote at second reading, not a direct change to the bill text. Defeating it meant the House did not attach that criticism to the motion to approve the bill in principle.
Defeated 44 to 88. Support came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating these detail-stage amendments kept the bill's procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. preference provisions in the version passed by the House.
Passed 93 to 44. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Community Strong Australia. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a procedural vote that let the House move immediately to deciding whether to accept the Senate's changes.
Passed 91 to 47. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, Community Strong Australia, and minor parties and independents.
This procedural vote cut off debate and forced an immediate decision on whether to accept the Senate's amendments.
Passed 97 to 42. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Centre Alliance, and Community Strong Australia. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
By accepting the Senate amendments, the House approved the final text of the bill and allowed it to pass both chambers in the same form.
Senate
Passed 32 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, and Liberal Party.
This successful committee-stage amendment changed the bill before final passage by strengthening protections around the content of workplace determinations.
Defeated 24 to 32. Support came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens.
Defeating the amendment meant the procurementThe Australian Government buying goods or services; a contested part of the bill lets the Commonwealth prefer some employers with enterprise agreements when awarding work or funding. provisions were not tied to a prior corruption inquiry before starting.
Passed 32 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, and UAP.
This successful amendment package changed the bill in the Senate by strengthening protections around workplace determination terms.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Amanda Rishworth supports the bill and says it will make the workplace relations system work better by improving Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. processes, backing good faith bargaining, extending protections for road transport contractors and making minor administrative fixes.
Read in Hansard ↗Zoe McKenzie says the coalition supports some sensible parts of the bill that would help the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. manage weak or AI-generated claims, but opposes the bill overall because it would let the Commonwealth favour businesses with union-backed enterprise agreements and would weaken accountability around the CFMEUA major union named in the debate because of concerns about procurement rules and reporting for its Construction and General Division administration. administration.
Read in Hansard ↗Allegra Spender says she supports the bill's practical measures for the Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers., road transport contractors and CFMEUA major union named in the debate because of concerns about procurement rules and reporting for its Construction and General Division administration. reporting, but she will not support the bill overall.
Read in Hansard ↗Tim Ayres supports the bill and says it will make the workplace relations system work better through practical changes that improve Fair Work CommissionThe national workplace tribunal that handles many employment disputes and agreement approvals; the bill gives it extra case-management powers. processes, encourage good faith bargaining and strengthen protections in areas like road transport.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
9 speakers · 9 support
“With this Bill today, we build on those reforms with a package of practical measures to further improve the operation of the workplace relations system and support more co-operative and productive workplaces.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026. This bill makes practical improvements to the workplace relations framework. It supports the Fair Work Commission to manage its workload, improves supported bargaining, allows Commonwealth procurement to promote secure jobs and fair conditions, and provides better support for truckies and road transport businesses. Some of these reforms are technical, but they are not minor. In workplace relations, procedure counts. It determines whether a worker can access a remedy, whether an employer can get certainty, whether a union can progress bargaining and whether the independent umpire can deal with disputes efficiently.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our landmark secure jobs, better pay bills and closing loophole reforms laid the foundations for a strong and efficient industrial relations system, and this bill builds on that. This bill reflects the government's ongoing commitment to ensuring our workplace relations framework supports cooperative and productive workplaces, the kinds of workplaces that work for businesses, for workers and for our economy. Labor is the party of workers. We're proud of that. The Australian Labor Party was born out of the labour movement. We will always stand up for working people, and I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026. This bill is about making our workplace system work better. It's about fairness, it's about secure jobs, and it's about sure making the system works for workers and employers alike.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Importantly, these reforms are not about reducing workplace protections, nor are they about limiting access to the commission. They are about ensuring the commission can focus its time and resources where they matter the most—resolving disputes, supporting bargaining and delivering outcomes. The bill streamlines a number of administrative processes and provides additional mechanisms to deal with applications that are frivolous, are vexatious or have no reasonable prospects of success. That matters and it matters because every hour spent dealing with matters that have little prospect of success is an hour that cannot be spent assisting workers and employers with genuine workplace disputes that need to be resolved so that all parties can move forward.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026, and I do so with a particular sense of purpose. Before I came to this place, I spent more than 10 years in the workplace relations and employment law trenches. I worked for the Electrical Trades Union, standing beside electricians and apprentices who had been shortchanged, underpaid or dismissed without cause. I also worked with the Nurses and Midwives Association, representing nurses working double shifts in understaffed wards who came to me pretty much exhausted and afraid of what would happen if they did speak up. I also worked for the Australian Hotels Association and their legal firm, advising employers in the hospitality sector—some were small, family-run operations who were trying to navigate a system that can feel complex and overwhelming. I regularly appeared in front of the Fair Work Commission as well as the Federal Circuit Court. I say this not to pad out my biography but more in relation to this particular bill not being an academic one. Every provision in it corresponds to something I have seen with my own eyes, experienced in real time and felt the weight of on behalf of real people.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is not complicated. It backs secure work, gives workers who have been shut out a way back in and lets our commission get on with their job. Those opposite will predictably whinge about it. They always rail against every protection working people have ever won, but we do not accept that insecure work and flat wages are just how it should be. We are proud to stand with working people, backing them in on higher wages and more secure work, giving them the tax cuts that they want and need and helping most of them get into their own home easier. Every day we are in this place, we focus on how we can advance the lives of working people, whereas those opposite—all three right-wing parties that we now have in this place—spend every day trying to make life harder for working people. While those opposite stand against workers, we on this side of the House stand with them. That's why I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The purpose of the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026 is to amend the Fair Work Act to make improvements to industrial relations arrangements. The building cooperative workplaces bill progresses important improvements to the workplace relations framework. Our landmark secure jobs, better pay and closing loopholes reforms laid the foundations, and I am pleased to inform the House that our work on these important reforms will continue with the passage of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill reflects the government's ongoing commitment to ensuring our workplace relations framework supports cooperative and productive workplaces—the kind of workplaces that work for businesses, workers and the broader economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
15 speakers · 16 contributions · 13 oppose · 2 mixed
“This brings me to the part of the bill which the coalition cannot and will not support, which goes to the Commonwealth preferencing employers with enterprise agreements in relation to grants, procurements or other contractual purposes. Here is where the devil is to be found in the detail, hidden behind a cloak of Orwellian language, such as 'preference enterprise agreements negotiated in good faith and genuinely agreed' or 'support enterprise bargaining that promotes job security and fair conditions'.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition won't oppose practical reform. We will say yes to good legislation and we will say yes to half of this. What we are saying is don't bundle good reform with cynical reform that's going to hurt small businesses, that's going to hurt the tradies in my electorate, that's going to hurt the small businesses in my electorate and that's going to hurt the taxpayers in my electorate, who are going to have to pay more for your preferred cynical industrial arrangements.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As coalition members have said previously, when it comes to the sensible parts of this bill that were put forward, we could absolutely support those any day. But the fact that they have been tied together with such an egregious assault on our freedoms is unacceptable.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said, the coalition supports the practical reforms that will help the Fair Work Commission deal with its workload. If the Prime Minister and those opposite had any respect for the Australian people, any respect for the people in the galleries today, what he would do and what they would do is they would separate this bill into two parts. They would take out the procurement bargaining sections and separate them from the reasonable reforms to the Fair Work Commission. I note that none of the contributions of those opposite are focused on the procurement bargaining provisions. They're all focused on the Fair Work Commission side. Those opposite would find that they would get support to put through the appropriate legislation, and then we could have a proper discussion about the bits that are controversial. This goes to the hide of this government. It goes to their irreverence and their inability to do what's right in the national interest. I say that the bill in its current form should be voted down.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will move amendments to remove those procurement bargaining provisions to allow the parliament to deal with the Fair Work Commission reforms on their merits, and then we can debate as to whether the Commonwealth should be saying: 'Well, you've got a certain type of EBA with the unions; you can have this Commonwealth project. But whilst you treat your workers absolutely fairly and pay them well and work with them, you don't have that type of EBA, so we're not going to give you any chance to participate in a Commonwealth contract.' That's not the way Australia should work. If the government refuses to separate these issues, the coalition cannot support this bill in its current form.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But, like so many pieces of legislation that were debating this week and that we have debated in the four years that I've been a member of this House, this government seeks to play wedge politics and has included a provision in the bill that is not related to AI but furthers their agenda and is so egregious that they know the coalition cannot support it. That is what they have done with this piece of legislation. They have added procurement requirements for the Public Service. One of the biggest drivers of opportunity in our country is procurement of government services, and this bill provides for unions and the union movement through enterprise bargaining agreements to get special treatment when it comes to procurement. I will touch on how egregious that is later in this speech, but, if you want to see how bad it is when you have unions controlling procurement, come and visit Victoria and see the $15 billion that has been rorted from taxpayers by the CFMEU. We have a premier, Jacinta Allan, who does not even want to investigate that $15 billion. That number, $15 billion of taxpayer money rorted and wasted in Victoria with the premier that won't look at it, will follow that premier to the election in November. It will follow every member of the Labor Party at a state and federal level in Victoria because they refuse to investigate and lift the lid on that $15 billion of taxpayer money that has been rorted out of the system.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Now while the coalition supports the vast majority of the practical elements within this bill, Labor have deliberately shoehorned in bad faith provisions, essentially forcing the opposition into a position where we must oppose it. The hypocrisy from the Prime Minister on this issue is staggering. Let us look at his own words regarding what he famously called 'wedge-islation'. In his very first press conference as Prime Minister he sanctimoniously declared he 'looked forward to leading a government that makes Australians proud, one that does not seek to divide or wedge, but seeks to bring people together peacefully.'”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The problem with this bill is not its entirety; it is its 'wedge-islation' structure, trying to wedge us on this side of the house, putting the arguably good with the demonstrably bad. The Fair Work Commission reforms are necessary, are evidence base and respond to a clear operational problem, but they have been bundled with procurement provisions that introduce significant economic risk, lack clear evidence of benefit and have attracted widespread stakeholder concern. Australia cannot afford to ignore productivity. It is the single most important driver of long-term prosperity. This bill contains measures that will help the Fair Work Commission operate more efficiently—and those measures should pass—but it also contains provisions that risk distorting procurement, reducing competition and embedding higher costs in major projects.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Unfortunately, this bill asks the parliament to support two completely different agendas wrapped up into one piece of legislation. On one hand, it contains sensible practical reforms requested by the Fair Work Commission itself. On the other hand, it contains significant and controversial changes that would allow the Commonwealth to preference businesses with union-covered enterprise agreements when awarding its contracts and grants. These issues are completely unrelated, so they should be considered separately.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The government should split the bill. That is why the opposition has circulated detailed amendments to that effect. We don't want the CFMEU coming to Canberra. Why those opposite do is beyond me, but we do not. This is where it goes to the 'wedge-islation'. I want to make very clear what the government has done here. Yesterday's gag motion—this was gagged—from the Leader of the House will mean that there will be no opportunity for the opposition to speak to other amendments. This matters because, at this stage, the opposition has circulated an amendment which tries to achieve the same objectives as the amendment moved by the member for Wentworth. I understand that the member for Wentworth's amendment will be considered first, therefore obviating the opposition's amendment. Without Labor's gag, the opposition may have been able to move its amendment first. That's what we were going to do. As it stands, Labor's gag motion prevents the normal consideration-in-detail process from occurring. Still, if our circulated amendment were to pass, the coalition would support this bill because we'd take out the 'bring the CFMEU to Canberra' part and deal with the Fair Work Commission part. But it doesn't. That is why we will not support this bill. We will not stand by and allow the government to rush through under a gag motion this appalling piece of legislation which brings the CFMEU back to Canberra and basically opens the taxpayer up to enormous cost overruns, which is the last thing we need as a country at this moment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“They're the two main issues, the two themes of this bill. The first one we support; the second one we do not support. In relation to the four main Fair Work Commission changes—the jurisdictional objections, the delegations, the vexatious litigants and determining matters on the papers—these are all are relatively sensible reforms, and the coalition is happy to support those. The coalition would like to see the government act responsibly and split the bill into these two main themes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We support the Fair Work Commission reforms but do not support the enterprise bargaining procurement changes. We call on the government to separate the two from the bill, and we'll support the Fair Work changes alone. If the government does not do this, we cannot support this bill as unamended.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michael McCormack on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Michael McCormack opposes the bill, arguing it weakens oversight of the construction industry and rewards a union movement he says has been corrupted by the CFMEUA major union named in the debate because of concerns about procurement rules and reporting for its Construction and General Division administration.. He says Labor should be defending the bill if it were sound, but instead it is advancing changes that will worsen misconduct and costs on building sites.
“There's a lot not to like about this bill, and you can tell there's a lot not to like about a bill when no Labor member has their name on the present speaker's list to defend the bill, to spruik the bill or to promote the bill. And I ask: why? Where are the Labor members when it comes to talking about the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026? They're missing in action. There's a reason why they're missing in action. We just heard from the member for Grey, talking about the particular report by no less than Geoffrey Watson SC entitled Rotting from the top. He investigated the corruption and the misconduct in the notorious CFMEU's Victorian construction branch. This report became public because it was tendered at Queensland's commission of inquiry into that union and its activities. We learned that there was $15 billion of misappropriation. Let's call it that. It was $15 billion of taxpayers' money. It was $15 billion of funds that could have and should have been spent on things other than just going into union thugs' pockets. Let's call them what they are; they are union thugs. They are ruling the roost in Victoria. The sooner the Labor government is jettisoned from the Treasury benches in Victoria the better. The sooner they are a long way away from Spring Street the better off the nation will be—not just Victoria and not just Melbourne but, indeed, the country.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McCormack opposes the bill, arguing it is not a minor administrative change but a broad workplace relations package that will heap extra costs, compliance and union influence on small business, construction and transport. He says the government should go back to the drawing board and review the legislation instead of forcing it through.
“The government would do well to go back to the drawing board, look at this legislation and review it. And yet there are no Labor speakers on this bill. Labor members so quickly and readily want to talk about unionising and making sure their unions get their fair share, but, when it comes to small business, to the construction sector and to the transport sector, they are nowhere to be seen defending their shoddy legislation.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I have deep concerns when looking at this bill—and the way that it constructs amendments around negotiations for enterprise agreements and procurement—that the CFMEU can get its hands all over this as well. I think taxpayers deserve better. I think our community deserves far better. That is why I stand in this place very strongly against what this bill seeks to do in relation to that. I will conclude my remarks early, and I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Fair Work Commission reforms contained in this bill seem to be warranted, but the procurement bargaining provisions will only further this government's aim to entrench union controlled enterprise agreement structures into the workplace landscape. This bill should be split so this House can pass the Fair Work Commission reforms while the implications of the procurement amendments can be properly examined. As it stands, I cannot give my support to this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 3 oppose
“Again, I support the elements of this bill that strengthen the Fair Work Commission, protect road transport contractors and fix the CFMEU reporting requirements; those reforms are practical and proportionate. But I cannot support legislation that creates the legal framework to preference union interests in the allocation of public money—not when documented corruption has turned parts of the enterprise agreement system into a vehicle for organised crime; not when the government said, five weeks before introducing this bill, that they didn't have any intention of doing what this bill empowers—or allows them, at least—to do; and not when one jurisdiction that tried a comparable scheme found it destroyed productivity, inflated costs and reduced housing supply.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This amendment does not decline the bill a second reading—the sensible measures in it deserve to pass—but it puts on the record my concern with part 9, which is that allowing a business's enterprise agreement arrangements to determine its access to grants and contracts cuts against the principle that public money should be allocated transparently and on merit—on value, capability, delivery and compliance—and that these provisions, with their broad ministerial power to extend their reach by instrument, should be removed from the bill. I will not let a significant corruption-sensitive procurement change ride through on the coat-tails of sensible reform. If this procurement prioritisation remains, I'll vote against this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“However, this bill also amends existing antidiscrimination provisions so that the government can give preference to employers whose employees are covered by an enterprise agreement in contracts, procurements and grants of financial assistance. I'm not opposed to enterprise agreements, but this bill would effectively enable the government to force employers to make agreements with unions if they want to have any chance of getting a tender or contract. This is ripe for misuse. It raises significant integrity and corruption concerns, especially in light of what we've seen with the CFMEU in Queensland and Victoria.”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 · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 88 to 45.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 87 to 43.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · 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.
Senate · 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.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 32 to 25.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Amendments considered
Recorded vote: 31 to 25.
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act.
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe formal approval by the Governor-General that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2026
Considered by scrutiny committee (25 June 2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2026
APH bill page notes
