ABCC's sham contracting sham

The ABCC’s long awaited report into its investigation of sham contracting in the construction industry has turned into another great sham: the ABCC has come up with no useful conclusions, no real solution, and appears to be in denial about the extent of sham contracting in the construction industry.

Its list of 10 recommendations reads like a job application for a future role for itself in the industry, rather than a real plan of action.

Bizarrely, the ABCC claims there is not enough evidence to prove extensive sham contracting in the construction—even though they have successfully prosecuted two companies, have four cases before the courts and another 32 investigations ongoing into allegations of sham contracting arrangements[i].

This also ignores the work of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Australian Tax Office, the Ralph and Henry reviews into the tax system and  the CFMEU’s own “Race to the Bottom” report – which agree sham contracting represents a major rorting of the tax system.

The ABCC criticised “Race to the Bottom” – based on a few employer objections to it – but failed to produce its own independent figures, despite having had 12 months to do it.

 All the ABCC could come up with was a plan for more research and ‘education’ for employers and employees on the appropriate use of ABNs and sham contracting.

CFMEU members have had that kind of information now for almost a year, in multiple languages. CFMEU National Office has produced a variety of information materials on Sham Contracting in Construction. Do more taxpayers’ dollars need to be spent reinventing the wheel?