John Setka warns Labor he plans to appeal court decision to allow expulsion
John Setka has warned Labor he intends to appeal a court decision allowing the national executive to expel him from the party, raising the stakes as parliament considers new laws to grant courts power to disqualify unionists.
In a letter to Labor’s lawyers on 27 August, seen by Guardian Australia, the controversial unionist’s lawyers revealed they have been instructed to file an application for leave to appeal against the Victorian supreme court justice Peter Riordan’s decision.
They sought an undertaking that Labor would not expel Setka before an appeal to the Victorian court of appeal, warning that he would seek an injunction to block the national executive if it pushed ahead. Despite the threat, Setka has yet to publicly confirm an appeal.
The letter explains why Labor has waited to capitalise on the favourable decision, despite the federal leader, Anthony Albanese, vowing to expel Setka for bringing Labor into disrepute. Albanese has cited Setka’s convictions for breaching a family violence intervention order and harassment, and allegations that he made comments denigrating the work of the anti-violence campaigner Rosie Batty. Setka denies making the comments about Batty.
On Monday the key crossbench senator Jacqui Lambie linked her vote on the Coalition’s ensuring integrity bill to Setka, warning that if he did not resign as Victorian secretary of the Construction Forestry Mining Maritime and Energy Union she would help pass the bill which gives courts powers to deregister unions and disqualify officials for law breaches.
“If John Setka doesn’t resign then those laws will pass,” she said. “There is no room there for anything else. It is
about time the meathead woke up to himself and realise the position he is placing people in.”
Labor’s shadow industrial relations minister, Tony Burke, responded that he was “not encouraging” Lambie to link her vote to Setka’s fate, arguing that she should oppose the bill “on merit”.
Burke told ABC TV that Setka was “a long way from … acting responsible”, urging him to “decide whether or not he thinks he is bigger than the rest of the union movement”.
“I don’t think Jacqui Lambie is bluffing, and it is also my view that the potential impact of this bill on the whole trade union movement is disastrous.
“It is a deliberately and anti-union bill designed to make it as difficult as possible for workers to be able to organise and, if it ends up going through, its impact will be way beyond one person in one union.”
Since Labor suspended Setka’s membership in June most of the labour movement – including its leader, Sally McManus – has urged him to resign his union position but Setka has dug in, with support from many CFMMEU Victorian delegates and a few other construction-related unions.
Burke said the Labor party would “follow all the legal processes” but as far as the party was concerned Setka was “already suspended, already gone, already in a situation where he can’t play any role”.
Employer groups have also argued that the ensuring integrity bill should be considered on its merits, noting that Setka is responsible for only a fraction of the industrial law breaches committed by the CFMMEU.
• Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning
The ensuring integrity bill could also pass with support from Centre Alliance, which controls two Senate votes.
Senator Rex Patrick told Guardian Australia he had raised concerns with the industrial relations minister, Christian Porter, that the bill granted power for the minister to apply to deregister unions, which is not the case for similar corporations law breaches.
He also warned that it could allow overseas convictions for matters that are not offences in Australia – such as homosexuality – or from jurisdictions without procedural fairness to ground disqualifications.
On Thursday the Senate education and employment committee will consider the bill along with separate legislation to prevent unions applying industrial pressure to employers to pay into workers’ benefit funds, which Porter claims are then used to raise income for unions. A Senate vote is not expected on either bill until the committee inquiries report back in October.