David Alexander interview on ABC NewsRadio on government procurement
Transcript: 12 June 2026
Sarah Morice:
The Albanese government is proposing reforms to the Workplace Relations Bill in a move that some say will discriminate against non-unionised businesses. Now, the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment Bill was introduced to Parliament last week and it will allow the Commonwealth to preference employers with an enterprise agreement when awarding government grants, but the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry believes it will negatively impact the majority of businesses. Here to explain why is the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Policy and Advocacy Chief David Alexander. David, hello.
David Alexander:
Hi, Sarah. Good to be here.
Sarah Morice:
Thank you. Can you explain why you are so concerned about this proposed bill?
David Alexander:
Yeah, we're very concerned. We think it's an extraordinary attempt to rig the selection process for deciding government procurement contracts and Commonwealth grants. Most businesses in Australia do not have union agreements. And what this bill does is it preferences those that do at the expense of those that don't. And we think this is an unacceptable development. It's going to have very bad impacts on all those businesses who will now be either rubbed out of being selected for grants or procurement contracts, or they're going to be driven into the arms of union bosses. They'll feel compelled that they have to do a deal. So, it's a very invidious choice that businesses will be faced with if this bill becomes law.
Sarah Morice:
We've had a response to this from the Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Amanda Rishworth, who has said that this bill does not impose any obligations on the Commonwealth to preference enterprise agreements or companies with enterprise agreements that are negotiated in good faith. It says how and when it would be appropriate to do so is being carefully considered as part of the development of the Secure Jobs Code. What do you say to that?
David Alexander:
The bill not only allows the Commonwealth to discriminate, it actively encourages the Commonwealth to discriminate for the purpose of increasing the number of union agreements. So, that's all in the legislation. That's why we're concerned. This builds in a bias for a purpose. So, whatever the minister's office might be saying, that's what's in the law right now. That’s what makes us very concerned.
Sarah Morice:
She's also said that they have seen some appalling misuse of bargaining in the construction sector and this has to stop. Would you agree there has been some appalling misuse of bargaining in the construction sector?
David Alexander:
Well, whatever behaviour there has been, it's no excuse for introducing a biased selection process for government procurement and grants. That's deeply unfair to those businesses that don't have union agreements. They will now be uncompetitive in looking to compete for those grants. We're talking very large sums of money here. The government procurement budget is around $105 billion. If that's now going to be biased towards union deals, that's going to be an enormous shift of power to union bosses. It's going to build in very inefficient workplace arrangements. We've already seen some of the consequences of rigged procurement going on in Victoria, for example. The CFMEU, there's been reports out of massive cost overruns. $15 billion was the estimate from the anti-corruption SC, Geoffrey Watson, about the cost of the Victorian government of cost overruns. It would be appalling if the Commonwealth were to take on what these practices are and legitimise them through this law.
Sarah Morice:
What do you think then the government should do instead to try and address what have been mistakes and issues around bargaining?
David Alexander:
Well, the first thing is they should withdraw this bill, because this would institutionalise and legitimise a rigged selection process. Beyond that, we'd be happy to sit down and speak with the minister's office about what might be done, where there are problems and how to address those issues without going into this sort of appalling measure.
Sarah Morice:
And do you think we would see businesses closing down because they wouldn't be getting the contracts that they wanted, or do you think it would push people into joining the union?
David Alexander:
Well, this will be the awful choice that businesses will face. They'll be thinking, "Goodness. I'm going to be marked down in the selection process because I don't have a union agreement, but goodness, I don't want to go and deal with these people. They are not good to deal with and they'll impose some extraordinary demands on me that are completely unacceptable”. They're very inefficient, one-size-fits-all contracts, very uncompetitive. So they will be faced with that choice. Some will be driven to deal with union bosses against their will, but they'll feel they have no other choice. It will be a well-founded fear that the Commonwealth is going to have a bias against them in the selection process. So, this is not just procurement, it's also grants. Many businesses receive grants from the federal government for innovation or industry assistance. The same rules will apply.
And it's not just construction. It's across board. It's all industries, whether it's IT consulting or food or transport or health or training, education — across the board.
(Audio ends)