ROYAL COMMISSION INTO TRADE UNION GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION

Level 1, 12 Moore Street, Canberra City, ACT

On Wednesday, 22 July 2015 at 10.00am (Day 8)

Before the Commissioner: The Hon. John Dyson Heydon AC QC

Counsel Assisting: Mr J Stoljar SC Mr Richard Scruby

Instructed by: Minter Ellison, Solicitors

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 658 Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 2 3 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, I call Mr Anthony Derouw. 4 5

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 659 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 my solicitors which was marked yesterday by the Commission. 2 3 To take an example - does the Commissioner have the 4 schedule? A copy was provided to Counsel Assisting 5 instructing solicitors. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: One problem I have is that I do not 8 have it, no. 9 10 MR DOCKING: I can provide a clean copy. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Stoljar? 13 14 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, with the greatest of respect to 15 my friend, I can't see how there could be any serious 16 reputational issue caused by any of the content of, from 17 memory, it was paragraph 6. I just don't have the -- 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: The actual schedule to which he is 20 referring, which I now have in my right hand, he says is 21 "not capable of being classified as credible evidence". 22 I personally don't think that is a just description of 23 those sentences, though their weight is no doubt another 24 matter. 25 26 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Put it this way: they are not so 29 weightless as to be inherently and, for all purposes, 30 incapable of being classified as credible. They may be 31 open to attack in argument. 32 33 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: So, unless there is anything further 36 that Mr Docking has to say, I will receive Mr Derouw's 37 statement unamended, as it were. 38 39 MR STOLJAR: May it please. 40 41 MR DOCKING: Commissioner, I do have something further to 42 say. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 45 46 MR DOCKING: Take paragraph 13, the first sentence, that 47 is simple idle speculation for which this witness has no

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 660 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 foundation to make, and it should not be put in a public 2 statement before this Commission. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: I respectfully disagree. 5 6 MR DOCKING: If it please the Commission. 7 8 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Derouw, this little argument we have 9 just been having is no reflection on you, it is just 10 technical questions about the admissibility of parts of 11 your statement. Yes, Mr Stoljar. 12 13 STATEMENT OF ANTHONY JAMES DEROUW DATED 08/07/2015 14 15 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Derouw, how long have you been at 16 APD? 17 A. For three years. 18 19 Q. You've always been a site foreman? 20 A. That's correct. 21 22 Q. Is there more than one or just the one? 23 A. Site foreman? 24 25 Q. Yes. 26 A. We have two site foremen. 27 28 Q. Had you been a plumber before that for someone else? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. For how long were you doing that? 32 A. Another two years. 33 34 Q. So you have been in the plumbing trade for five years 35 or so? 36 A. Yes. Well, I started plumbing when I was 16, so that 37 was -- 38 39 Q. Oh, okay, 12 years or so. 40 A. But in ACT, yes. 41 42 Q. You're 28 now? 43 A. Yes, that's correct. 44 45 Q. In May 2013, you were on the Antill site, or at least 46 APD was on the Antill site. Had there been a vote whether 47 or not APD would enter into an EBA at about that time?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 661 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Were you, yourself, involved in that vote? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Can you tell me about it, what happened? 7 A. We went to the CEPU's office in Mitchell. 8 9 Q. Who went? 10 A. Staff members of APD. 11 12 Q. Roughly, how many, five, 10? 13 A. It would be under 10, I'd say, from my best 14 recollection. We listened to obviously what the 15 representatives had to say, and they just spoke about their 16 piece and what they could sort of offer us in the way of 17 their services and what they do, a little bit about them. 18 They also handed out basically, you know, what they were 19 about, a bit of paperwork, and then on the other side of 20 that, the other side of that page, was our membership forms 21 and sort of direct debit details for a membership. 22 23 Q. And what happened then? Was Mr Hooper there? 24 A. No, he was not present. 25 26 Q. Do you remember who it was from the Union? 27 A. My best recollection is, I definitely did see 28 Damian Kirkwood, but I can't recollect the other 29 characters. 30 31 Q. But there was more than one, was there? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. How long did the meeting take? 35 A. I went there in the afternoon. Maybe about an hour, 36 I'd say. 37 38 Q. Had you received any pressure, one way or the other, 39 from Mr Hooper as to what to do or how to vote? 40 A. No. 41 42 Q. Had he said anything to you or any of the others, to 43 your knowledge? 44 A. No. 45 46 Q. How did the vote go? What happened? 47 A. We voted "yes" for it, and then obviously once you

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 662 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 turn over that page, they - you had a look at the direct 2 debit form. A lot of the boys are fairly young, they were 3 sort of a bit apprehensive at first to give out their bank 4 details and they said they needed time to think about it 5 and the representative said, "That's fine", if we can get 6 it to us, then that's no drama, you don't have to do it 7 today. 8 9 Q. There has been some evidence from one of the Union 10 officials, Mr Broadley, who says that at that meeting the 11 boys were excited about becoming CEPU members. Does that 12 accord with your observation? 13 A. No, that's incorrect. 14 15 Q. Did anyone act or talk as if they were excited about 16 becoming a member? 17 A. No. 18 19 Q. You recount in your statement the Union coming to the 20 site at Antill and at least Mr Kirkwood and someone else 21 wanted to have a meeting with the staff then, and I will 22 come to that. Between the vote and Mr Kirkwood coming to 23 the site of Antill Street, did something happen about the 24 EBA? Did you have discussions or -- 25 A. We had discussions with the employees and me on site, 26 sort of, I suppose, pondering what they were offering us. 27 But as - we had a bit of a think about it, obviously, not 28 at the office, offsite, and discussions go through and we 29 thought, "Well, what are they offering us?" As I was 30 saying, you know, obviously, protection from - you know, 31 "We can look after you", and the benefits of being a Union 32 member, and I know that our services that Jason provides on 33 site, with our contractors from our apprentices through to 34 our tradesmen, are probably unmatched to any other 35 contractor in Canberra that he provides, and his 36 relationship directly working with the boys from 37 apprentices, all the way to tradesmen, in minor details and 38 major details, and one of the biggest things he promotes on 39 site is happiness and morale within the company and a good 40 working relationship with our boss. So, we thought, well, 41 we'd rather keep those fees in our back pocket rather than 42 in the Union's. 43 44 Q. When you say the services that Jason Hooper provides, 45 what sort of things did you have in mind? 46 A. Is our teaching environment and the learning 47 environment for all our apprentices and our tradesmen.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 663 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 It's, you know - there's always - there's always a lot, 2 especially when your boss gets to a certain size of 3 business, you don't generally see him a lot on site, but 4 Jason always makes the effort to be on site with the boys 5 and he's very approachable and humble if you ever have an 6 issue with the trade or a personal issue, he's very 7 approachable. So, all those kind of things, and any other 8 dramas you have, he's very accommodating. 9 10 Q. Tell me if this is right or not, but did you feel like 11 you needed a union to intervene between you and the boss, 12 or did you feel like you could just approach him, yourself? 13 A. No. We feel that we can approach him, ourselves, and 14 we don't need anybody else to litigate things between us 15 and our employer. 16 17 Q. What about training and the like? Does he assist with 18 that side of things? 19 A. Training and the like, he's very experienced in what 20 he does, and he's very passionate; everything has to be 21 100 per cent. He's willing to share his knowledge of the 22 trade with our employees, whether it's - like I was saying, 23 whether it is with an apprentice or tradesman, through 24 basic or complex situations, he's always willing to provide 25 his services and help out where he can. 26 27 Q. All right. Is this the position, that you and the 28 other employees decided, or you made some further decision 29 about the EBA, did you, or did you decide you didn't want 30 to go ahead with it? 31 A. Yes, we didn't really want to go ahead with it. We 32 thought if there is matters to be sorted, we can mediate 33 between ourselves and our boss. We had the trust in him 34 to sort it out. 35 36 Q. Did you get any pressure from Mr Hooper one way or the 37 other about that decision? 38 A. Not at all. 39 40 Q. Did you, yourself, resign your membership, or can you 41 not remember whether you had actually joined or not? 42 A. Well, we had a - we asked Jason to draft us up a 43 letter at the office at our consent to sign and send over 44 to say we weren't interested in joining the CEPU. 45 46 Q. Oh, I see. Who asked Jason to draft that up? 47 A. I did.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 664 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Again, did he put any pressure on anyone about 3 resigning or joining or -- 4 A. No. 5 6 Q. That was a decision that you guys reached? 7 A. A decision that we made. 8 9 Q. There is this meeting at Antill Street, at the 10 Antill Street site with Mr Kirkwood. Tell me, you touch on 11 it in 8, but tell me, in your own words, what actually 12 happened? 13 A. Well, we knew that - we got a call - oh, well, the 14 Milin developers got a call because they were previously at 15 the Easty Street site at Woden and they had a feeling that, 16 look, they may pay us a visit as they are the same builders 17 on this job. I was floating around the front of the job at 18 the time and I remember seeing Mr Kirkwood show up on to 19 site talking to Mazen, as in my statement, the building 20 foreman there at the time. He was in the office and he was 21 asking about what subcontractors were on site, and then as 22 Damian seen me, he approached me, and said, "May I have a 23 word to your boys and have a chat?", and I was more than 24 willing to, so I gathered them together and we had a chat 25 just on site. 26 27 Q. And what sort of things did he say? 28 A. Talking about how our boss hadn't signed the EBA and 29 it is a risky decision that he hasn't signed it and they 30 can - their services are going to provide - offer us 31 protection in case we are made redundant, all that kind of 32 stuff. They can be the mediator in between to sort things 33 out between us and our boss through being a Union member. 34 35 Q. Do you remember if you or any of the other guys said 36 anything? 37 A. No, it was sort of fresh to us at first, so we just 38 listened and gave him the time and then, after that, we 39 basically went back to work. 40 41 Q. You called Mr Hooper and just reported what had 42 happened, did you? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Did you tell Mr Hooper words to the effect that the 46 employees were pleased with his decision not to go ahead 47 with the EBA? Do you remember that?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 665 A J DEROUW (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I can't recall that. 2 3 Q. I'm sorry, did you tell Mr Kirkwood that, that the 4 employees were pleased with Mr Hooper's decision not to go 5 ahead with the EBA? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. You can't remember that? Did you tell him whether or 9 not - Mr Kirkwood - that they wanted to be members? 10 A. No, I didn't say anything about that. 11 12 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further. Thank you, Commissioner. 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Docking? 15 16 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 17 18

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 666 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 discussions about entering into an enterprise agreement? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. So, you're in no position to dispute Mr Kirkwood's 5 evidence that in six and a half years as a CEPU official, 6 he had never stopped any plumbing site in the ACT? 7 A. No. 8 9 Q. You have never heard any discussion Mr Kirkwood for 10 those six and a half years ever interrupted or disrupted a 11 plumbing site in the ACT, have you? 12 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 13 14 Q. And given it is a small town, if he had done so -- 15 16 MR STOLJAR: I object, Commissioner. It's not a small 17 town. 18 19 MR DOCKING: I will rephrase it. 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: It is a large capital city of the only 22 country in the world which occupies a continent. It is a 23 very important town, and hundreds of thousands of people 24 live here. It may be a small town in hydraulic services 25 circles, or terms. I know there was evidence yesterday 26 that it was a small town, but it is not really a small 27 town. 28 29 MR DOCKING: I am only relying on the evidence rather than 30 my own opinion. I can rephrase it in any way. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: I have lived in it off and on for the 33 better part of eight decades, or near it. I know what 34 Canberra is. It is a large city. Now, back to the 35 questions. 36 37 MR DOCKING: I can rephrase it this way. 38 39 Q. For how many years have you worked in the ACT doing 40 plumbing work? 41 A. Five. 42 43 Q. Drawing upon your five years experience, having worked 44 in the ACT doing plumbing work, if Mr Kirkwood on behalf of 45 the CEPU had obstructed or closed down a site regarding 46 plumbers, would you expect to hear about it? 47 A. Yes.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 667 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. And you have never heard any suggestion, have you, 3 that he has done so? 4 A. No. 5 6 Q. I then take you to Mr Kirkwood's statement. If you go 7 to page number 4 - tell me when you have opened it on that 8 page. 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. Can I explain the scheme of this. What he has done, 12 when he says in paragraph 20 he refers to a paragraph in 13 your statement, he is responding to your statement. Do you 14 follow? If you need to look at your statement at the same 15 time, please do so. 16 A. Okay. 17 18 Q. Do you accept that he visited the site on 27 May 2013, 19 as he, being Mr Kirkwood, has set out in paragraph 20 of 20 his statement? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. As I understand your oral evidence today, that is, the 24 answers you have provided to Counsel Assisting, there was 25 agreement amongst Advanced Plumbing employees and Mr Hooper 26 that Mr Kirkwood could speak to the employees? 27 A. Sorry, can you repeat that? 28 29 Q. Is it not the case that when Mr Kirkwood attended on 30 27 May 2013, there was agreement that he could talk to the 31 employees and they'd listen to what he had to say? 32 A. I guess. I mean, he's - there's no dramas to talk to 33 me. He showed up on site and we -- 34 35 Q. You were happy to talk to him and hear what he had to 36 say? 37 A. Yes, I did. There was no dramas. 38 39 Q. At that stage you were a member of the CEPU, 27 May 40 2013? 41 A. Sorry, I just can't recall the dates of when - sorry, 42 the signing and when he talked to us. 43 44 Q. I suggest to you as at that day, you had not resigned 45 from the CEPU and you were a member? 46 A. Yes. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 668 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. To your knowledge, other employees at that discussion 2 were also still members of the CEPU? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. And you accept that it was Mr Hooper that drafted any 6 letters of resignation from the CEPU? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. Going to when there was a vote in support of the 10 enterprise agreement, it was a "yes" vote for those 11 employees present? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. Was it the case, as you understood it, those who were 15 able to go and vote included both members and non-members 16 of the CEPU? 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. And to your knowledge, were some of the people present 20 who voted "yes" for the enterprise agreement non-members? 21 A. I can't recall. 22 23 Q. Is it the case that everyone voted, at least at that 24 meeting, in favour of entering into the enterprise 25 agreement? 26 A. I can't recall. 27 28 Q. There was no management present at the vote in favour 29 of the enterprise agreement, was there? 30 A. No. 31 32 Q. Going back then to Mr Kirkwood's statement, you accept 33 that a topic raised by Mr Kirkwood was about Mr Hooper not 34 signing the enterprise agreement? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. If you go to Mr Kirkwood's statement, paragraph 21, do 38 you see he says that he cannot recall being accompanied on 39 that day by any other official, or speaking to Maz, and 40 then he says, "Although it is possible that I did." Are 41 you able to assist at all as to the name of any other 42 official you suggest might have been there? 43 A. I can't recall. 44 45 Q. Might you be mistaken that there was more than one 46 CEPU official? 47 A. I did say there was one - there were two officials,

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 669 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 but one I recognised as Damian. I can't recall the other. 2 3 Q. When is the first time you ever put your version down 4 in a witness statement? 5 A. Two weeks ago. 6 7 Q. Do you accept, given this deals with matters some two 8 years and over two months ago, you might be mistaken about 9 some of the detail? 10 A. No. 11 12 Q. I then take you to paragraph 22 of Mr Kirkwood. You 13 have already accepted that you were still a Union member? 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. So there was no reason for Mr Kirkwood to try to 17 convince you to become a Union member because you already 18 were one as at that day? 19 A. As I was saying before, it was mainly with the EBA 20 talking about the protection and what they offer as a 21 service. 22 23 Q. So, you accept that Mr Kirkwood wasn't there trying to 24 convince you, personally, to be a member because you 25 already, as at that date, were a member? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. And from what you saw and heard, Mr Kirkwood was not 29 trying to convince anyone else present at the meeting to be 30 a Union member because they already were members? 31 A. Yes, it was to do with the EBA. 32 33 Q. Was it a lawyer at the Royal Commission who took this 34 statement off you, about two weeks ago? 35 A. I was taken by a member of the AFP. 36 37 Q. The Australian Federal Police? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. I then take you to paragraph 8 of your statement. 41 Given the evidence you've given to me in the last three or 42 so questions, your statement is incorrect when you suggest 43 Mr Kirkwood tried to convince you to become a member of the 44 Union, isn't it? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, really, there needs to be an

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 670 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 element of fairness in this. If my friend really wants to 2 travel through all this, he would really have to go 3 through, and whether it assists the Commission or not, 4 I don't know, but he would really have to travel through - 5 if I take you, Commissioner, to the sequence of events in 6 28 and following in Mr Hooper's statement. I say it like 7 this, only so there is no suggestion that I am saying it 8 all in front of this witness, but have a look at 30, these 9 letters are all sent, they are dated this day. Then 10 Mr Hooper records receiving a call from Mr Broadley. So 11 Mr Broadley has this discussion and it may well be that the 12 letters have already arrived by then. 13 14 Then Mr Broadley instructs, as I recollect his 15 evidence, Mr Kirkwood to go to the Antill site. It is not 16 so implausible that there is some lack of clarity about 17 whether people are members or not at this stage. As I 18 understand it, no money has been paid, some forms have been 19 done and letters have been sent resigning, and there may 20 well have been a discussion, but to simply say, "Well, you 21 were a member", or "you weren't", it's -- 22 23 MR DOCKING: I object to this, Commissioner. 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Just one moment, Mr Docking. I am 26 prepared to allow this questioning. I am deeply oppressed 27 by the slow pace of proceedings. There are many, many 28 people waiting to give evidence, and I think it might be 29 quicker just to let Mr Docking do it his way. If there is 30 some defect in the way he is doing it, that can be analysed 31 afterwards. 32 33 Mr Docking, I think the witness had answered your last 34 question, so you are at liberty to proceed with another 35 question. 36 37 MR DOCKING: Yes. I'm concerned -- 38 39 THE COMMISSIONER: No. Mr Docking, questions, please, no 40 speeches. 41 42 MR DOCKING: Well, may I say one comment, with respect? 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: No. Next question. 45 46 MR DOCKING: If it please the Commission. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 671 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Going to your statement, it was incorrect that 2 Mr Kirkwood, on that occasion, was trying to convince to 3 sign up other persons present as Union members because they 4 had already signed up? 5 A. Sorry, can you repeat the question? 6 7 Q. It is incorrect in paragraph 8 of your statement to 8 suggest that Mr Kirkwood was trying to convince other 9 Advanced Plumbing employees to sign up as Union members 10 because they had already signed up to be members? 11 A. Signed up but not paying members, yes. 12 13 Q. You agree that he wasn't there trying to convince 14 people to be signed up as members because they already had 15 signed up? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. If you look at paragraph 23 of Mr Kirkwood's 19 statement, if you go to the second sentence, on the third 20 line, it is correct, is it not, that Mr Kirkwood did talk 21 to the employees about the benefits of the Union EA that 22 had been negotiated and agreed to by Mr Hooper? 23 A. I do recall him talking about the benefits, yes. 24 25 Q. If you look at the last sentence in paragraph 23, the 26 correct position is that Mr Kirkwood did not say the Union 27 could protect employees from the boss if they were made 28 redundant? 29 A. That's incorrect. 30 31 Q. If you go to paragraph 25, from what you saw and heard 32 - look at the last sentence - is this correct: on that 33 site, on 27 May 2013, Advanced Plumbing was the only 34 company or operator on site that the CEPU had coverage? 35 A. Well, we were the only contractor that they spoke to. 36 37 Q. As you understood it, you were the only plumbers on 38 site? 39 A. That's correct. 40 41 Q. I then want to take you to the statement of Mr McCann, 42 to paragraph 21 on page 4. Has anybody communicated to you 43 in any way whatsoever what is in paragraph 21? Answer that 44 after you have read it to yourself. 45 A. I can't recall that. 46 47 Q. Is this the first time someone has pointed out that

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 672 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 paragraph to you? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. You say you can't recall it. You can't deny that 5 Mr Hooper approached employees and said something like: 6 7 I don't want you guys to be in the Union. 8 9 A. That never happened. 10 11 Q. What do you say to the suggestion that Mr Hooper said: 12 13 I have prepared letters of resignation for 14 everyone to sign. 15 16 A. That's incorrect. 17 18 Q. I think, at least, you accept Mr Hooper actually got 19 them typed up? 20 A. Yes, at the employees' request. 21 22 Q. Who else, apart from you, do you say, expressly asked 23 Mr Hooper to prepare those letters of resignation? 24 A. I can't recall that. 25 26 Q. Isn't it the case, or is it the case, I'll put it that 27 way, that the employees did what Mr Hooper wanted and they 28 signed letters of resignation? 29 A. They done it of their free will. 30 31 Q. And they also did it of their own free will at the 32 meeting to vote for the enterprise agreement? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. I just want to draw upon your experience, having 36 worked at sites of Advanced Plumbing for some five years, 37 I want you to assume there is evidence as at 26 February 38 2015, Mr Hooper said he had two years work in front of 39 them, being Advanced Plumbing, with unlimited overtime. In 40 your experience, that was right, as at 26 February 2015, it 41 had that sort of work in front of it? 42 A. I can't comment on that. 43 44 Q. Going back to 2014, were you told that there was also 45 work in front of the employees by way of further contracts? 46 A. I can't recall. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 673 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Are these matters he wouldn't discuss with you? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. You agree he wouldn't discuss that with you? 5 A. Sorry, say again? 6 7 Q. Would he discuss with you how many years or months of 8 contracts he had lined up for Advanced Plumbing to perform? 9 A. No. 10 11 Q. I just want to go to this final issue. Were you aware 12 at any stage for at least one employee, Mr Hooper's company 13 was not paying the correct enterprise agreement rate; that 14 he hadn't given a pay increase which was due from June 15 2014? 16 A. No, I didn't know that. 17 18 Q. Did you ever receive any backpay from him? 19 A. No. 20 21 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Docking. Mr Agius, any 24 questions? 25 26 MR AGIUS: We have no questions. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Morison? 29 30 MR MORISON: No, Commissioner. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin? 33 34 MR CHIN: No, Commissioner. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Stoljar? 37 38 MR STOLJAR: Nothing, Commissioner. 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: It is in order for Mr Derouw to be 41 excused? 42 43 MR STOLJAR: Yes, Commissioner. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Derouw, you were brought here by 46 means of a summons. You are excused from further 47 attendance on that summons. Thank you very much for giving

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 674 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 up your time. You can leave the witness box and leave the 2 hearing room if you wish. 3 4

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 675 A J DEROUW (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 STATEMENT OF GIUSEPPE ("JOE") GIOFFRE DATED 15/07/2015 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Are there any other statements in that 5 category? 6 7 MR STOLJAR: No. That concludes, at this stage, anyway, 8 the statements in respect of Advanced Plumbing. 9 10 The next witness is Mr Milin. Mr Agius yesterday was 11 not in a position to cross-examine Mr Milin. I am not sure 12 whether that position has developed overnight, but, in any 13 event - it appears he can. I will ask Mr Scruby to take 14 the next witness. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. 17 18

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 676 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 This is not a problem that need worry you, Mr Milin. 3 There are certain types of information in statements we 4 endeavour to keep private in the interest of witnesses. 5 That is an example of one of them. That is in evidence. 6 Yes, Mr Agius? 7 8 MR AGIUS: I rise just to deal with one objection, 9 paragraph 22, the last sentence. Mr McDonald is not being 10 called. He has written a letter. The letter speaks for 11 itself. This witness's understanding of what can be seen 12 between the lines in the letter is, in our respectful 13 submission, of no matter and of very little weight. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: I think I will admit the statement, 16 subject to that objection. Your last remark could well be 17 itself of weight. 18 19 Mr Milin's statement is received with the excision of 20 the information in the first line, otherwise subject to 21 Mr Agius's objection. 22 23 STATEMENT OF DENNIS MILIN DATED 20/07/2015 24 25 MR SCRUBY: Q. Mr Milin, you are a director of Milin 26 Builders Pty Ltd and several other companies in the Milin 27 Group. Is it the case that you're also the managing 28 director of Milin? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. Is it just Milin that you're managing director of, or 32 are there other companies in the group that you're -- 33 A. There are other companies as well. 34 35 Q. You're not managing director of those, just of Milin, 36 is that the position? 37 A. I am of some others, but Milin is basically the 38 building firm that does the construction work that I'm the 39 managing director of -- 40 41 Q. And you set out -- 42 A. -- Milin Builders. 43 44 Q. I'm sorry. 45 A. Milin Builders Pty Ltd. 46 47 Q. Thank you. You have set out in paragraph 3 your

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 677 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 qualifications and experience. In paragraph 4, you say 2 that Milin has about 25 employees. What is the breakdown 3 in relation to those employees in terms of what sort of 4 work they were doing? 5 A. There'd probably be office staff, about four to five. 6 There'd be a construction manager, one, project managers, 7 three to four, site managers, about three or four, foremen, 8 about two or three; then the balance would be construction 9 workers and machinery operators. 10 11 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 5 you refer to the 12 IQ Apartments Project. Is this the position, that Milin 13 was engaged on the design phase of the project, and there 14 was an expectation that you would construct the building 15 but that ended up not happening? 16 A. That's correct. 17 18 Q. Is this the position, in a nutshell, that the 19 Tradies Group was brought in by the developer as, in 20 effect, a joint venture; is that right? 21 A. I believe so, yes. 22 23 Q. Mr Hall was representing the Tradies Group; is that 24 the position? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. In paragraph 8, you say you had a meeting with Mr Hall 28 and Mr O'Mara and you say that Mr Hall said to you: 29 30 "Who would ever imagine that we would be 31 working together." 32 33 Do you see that? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. What did you understand him to mean when he said that 37 to you? 38 A. I think over the years that the relationship had been 39 strained at times. That's what I think he was referring 40 to. 41 42 Q. In what way had the relationship been strained? 43 A. Oh, just through EBA negotiations and in relation to 44 choice of contractors. 45 46 Q. Were you negotiating an EBA at this time with the 47 CFMEU?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 678 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. No. 2 3 Q. But, is this right, you had had previous negotiations? 4 A. That's correct. 5 6 Q. What had been the result of those negotiations? Had 7 you entered into an EBA with the CFMEU? 8 A. Yes, we did. 9 10 Q. You did? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. I gather, though, that at this time you didn't 14 actually have an EBA with the CFMEU? 15 A. We had site specific EBAs in 2012. 16 17 Q. I see. So when Mr Hall said you would need an EBA, he 18 meant you would need an EBA that would cover this site, is 19 that the position? 20 A. I believe so. 21 22 Q. You said: 23 24 I suppose I would need one. 25 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. Why did you say that? 29 A. Because I'd had one on previous projects that the 30 Union wanted me to have. 31 32 Q. I see. But why would you need one on this project? 33 A. Because the Union require builders to have one on 34 every project, I believe. 35 36 Q. Is that something that has been said to you by any 37 representatives of the CFMEU, namely, that builders have to 38 have an EBA? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. When has that been said, apart from this occasion? 42 A. Oh, always. It's common knowledge that the CFMEU 43 require most builders to have EBAs. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. I think Mr Scruby wants to know 46 whether any official of the CFMEU had said to you "You must 47 get an EBA in order to conduct work on a site". Did

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 679 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Mr Hall say it on some other occasion -- 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. -- or any other official? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 MR SCRUBY: Q. When has Mr Hall said that to you, apart 8 from this occasion? 9 A. Oh, probably in 2009 on the Oracle Project, probably 10 2011 on The Edge or Synergy Projects, on the 11 Lakefront Project, Eclipse, all developments, apartment 12 developments, we've constructed in the ACT. 13 14 Q. When you say "probably", do you have a recollection of 15 that or not? 16 A. I would have somewhere, a written one, but I do - I'm 17 well aware of which sites we had EBAs on. 18 19 Q. You say that he said that to you in relation to all 20 developments, apartment developments that you have 21 constructed in the ACT. Are you constructing any 22 developments at the moment? 23 A. I am. 24 25 Q. Which ones are they? 26 A. There's the Brooklyn Apartments in Turner and Trilogy 27 Apartments in Woden. 28 29 Q. In relation to the Brooklyn Apartments in Turner, has 30 Mr Hall said to you that you have to have an EBA to be the 31 builder on that project? 32 A. I haven't spoken to Mr Hall since about August last 33 year, and we commenced that project probably about October 34 last year, so, no. 35 36 Q. Has anyone else from the CFMEU spoken to you about 37 EBAs in relation to the Brooklyn Apartments in Turner? 38 A. No. 39 40 Q. In relation to the Trilogy Apartments in Woden, has 41 Mr Hall said to you in relation to that development that 42 you need to have an EBA? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Well, what did he say? 46 A. Basically, he asked me what was going on in relation 47 to a block of land in Woden, and I told him I wasn't sure

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 680 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 at that stage and he said that I needed to understand there 2 would be no development and no building work going on there 3 if there's no EBA. 4 5 Q. I see. 6 A. Words to that effect. 7 8 Q. When was this conversation? 9 A. 26 August 2014. 10 11 Q. Was it a conversation that you had in person or was it 12 over the phone? 13 A. No, it was over the phone. It was about a seven to 14 eight minute conversation. 15 16 Q. This is a conversation that you've made some notes 17 about; is that right? 18 A. I did. 19 20 Q. I think you provided those notes to the Commission 21 this morning? 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. I think we have a copy of those to show you. I'll ask 25 you some questions about this document, Mr Milin, and then 26 I'll ask that it be received into evidence. Are these the 27 notes that you provided to the Commission this morning? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. There is a heading at the top of the page saying: 31 32 Record of conversation 33 34 Summary of Hall's conversation points to 35 Dennis Milin. 36 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. Is what follows under that, all the way through to the 40 heading down the bottom of the page "Record of 41 Hall/Amalgamated phone conversation", are they the notes of 42 your conversation with Mr Hall regarding the 43 Trilogy Project? 44 A. Most of them, yes. 45 46 Q. When you say "most of them", do you have other notes 47 of this conversation?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 681 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. No. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Can I just ask this Mr Milin: as 4 the conversation was proceeding, did you write down what he 5 was saying to you? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. Did you compose this document shortly after the 9 conversation concluded? 10 A. Probably about I believe - I'm not - I believe it was 11 about 40 hours later, 48 hours. 12 13 Q. So, you wrote it down, dictated it and had it typed in 14 this form? 15 A. No, I told a colleague about the conversation. He 16 said I should take some notes, and then I explained to him 17 the conversation that took place and he took the notes. 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Scruby. 20 21 MR SCRUBY: Q. I'll come back to the conversation in a 22 minute, but can you tell the Commission what appears under 23 the heading "Record of Hall/Amalgamated phone 24 conversation", down the bottom of the page? 25 A. Read that out? 26 27 Q. My document says: 28 29 Hall/CFMEU then called Greg Lemin at 30 Amalgamated and told them of their position 31 on using Milin as a builder. No EBA - no 32 building allowed. Hall advised Amalgamated 33 that going with Milin as a builder would be 34 a risk (ie unacceptable risk) for 35 Amalgamated. Amalgamated should think 36 about it. 37 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. How did you come to record that in this document? 41 I am sorry, I think it goes over the page. It also says: 42 43 Amalgamated then confirmed with Milin that 44 Hall/CFMEU had contacted them. 45 46 A. Yes. I believe that Greg Lemin spoke to one of my 47 colleagues and advised him of the conversation that took

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 682 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 place, and we also recorded that, to the best of our 2 knowledge. 3 4 Q. Did one of your colleagues tell you that? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. Who was that colleague? 8 A. Mr Seselja and I spoke to Greg Lemin personally. 9 10 Q. What did Mr Lemin say to you? 11 A. He advised me that a conversation took place between 12 the CFMEU and himself. 13 14 Q. Is that all he said? 15 A. I didn't want to - yes, that's basically all he said 16 to me. 17 18 Q. He didn't say what happened, what was said in that 19 conversation? 20 A. Basically, they raised the issue of Milin not having 21 an EBA. 22 23 Q. Yes. Well, did he say how that issue was raised or 24 what was said about it? 25 A. He just said that he was contacted by Dean Hall and 26 they had a brief conversation, and I believe Greg told him 27 he's not the person who makes the decisions. 28 29 Q. Did Mr Lemin say to you that Mr Hall told him that, 30 "Going with Milin as a builder would be a risk 31 (ie unacceptable risk)"? 32 A. Words to that effect. 33 34 Q. And that Amalgamated should think about it? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. What did Mr Seselja tell you about this issue? 38 A. Basically, he told me that Greg received a call from 39 the CFMEU, and basically - of similar substance. 40 41 Q. Is this the position, that Amalgamated, are they the 42 builder on the Trilogy Project? 43 A. No. 44 45 Q. I'm sorry, the developer on the Trilogy Project? 46 A. They're development managers. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 683 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Can you tell us a bit about how the project is 2 structured? Who is the -- 3 A. Usually, you have a landowner and then you have a 4 development entity and then usually that's managed by a 5 development manager, and they engage the builder once it 6 gets an approved DA, I suppose. 7 8 Q. In this case, who is the landowner of the Trilogy 9 development? 10 A. I believe it's a joint venture between APG, which is 11 Graham Potts and myself. 12 13 Q. I see. Where does Amalgamated fit in? 14 A. They're the development manager. 15 16 Q. I see. Its role is to manage a development entity, is 17 that how the structure works? 18 A. No, it manages the overall development from design, to 19 marketing, to financing, to sales. 20 21 Q. I see. Could you tell us a bit about the development 22 itself? I mean, where is it? 23 A. It's in Woden on Irving Street. It's three buildings, 24 ranging from seven to 12 storeys, and it's 323 apartments. 25 26 Q. Just in rough terms, can you tell us what the budget 27 for the job is? 28 A. About $75 million. 29 30 Q. The conversation that you had with Mr Hall happened on 31 26 August 2014. What stage was the project at as at 32 26 August 2014? 33 A. I think there was - on site there was just the display 34 suite on site and hoarding was in place and marketing 35 signage was up. 36 37 Q. I see. 38 A. No construction work had commenced. 39 40 Q. I see. Well, what happened? This was a conversation 41 on the phone. Did Mr Hall ring you or did you ring him? 42 A. He called me. 43 44 Q. I see. In paragraph 3 of your note you record him as 45 saying: 46 47 You understand that you'll never be allowed

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 684 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 to build without an EBA in place ... 2 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. He then you ask, "Why", and he says: 6 7 I'd be the laughing stock of the union 8 movement in Canberra if we didn't have one 9 in place ... 10 11 A. (Nods). 12 13 Q. What did you understand that to mean, his reference to 14 "being a laughing stock of the Union movement"? 15 A. Oh, I just - I just felt as though if he was unable to 16 get a builder to sign an EBA, that it could be perceived as 17 a weakness. I don't know really. 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Scruby, can I just interrupt, just 20 to ask a formal question. 21 22 Q. In this document there are various numbered 23 paragraphs, for example, the first one is "1. Hall", then 24 "2" says "In due course". May we take it that the "2", to 25 understand the structure, it should say "I"? In other 26 words, Mr Hall said, "I hear you are going to start 27 building in Woden", and you said, "In due course, but the 28 DA isn't even approved yet"; is that correct? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. And then "3" we have "Hall", "4" is blank, so that 32 would be you saying "Why?"? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. That structure, I think, is easy to follow. When you 36 get down to "7", there is no reference to Hall there. May 37 we take it that what is set out in 7 is something that 38 Mr Hall said to you? 39 A. Yes, Mr Hall said that. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: I think that covers everything. Yes. 42 Thank you, Mr Scruby. 43 44 MR SCRUBY: Q. In paragraph 7, is this right, Mr Hall 45 said to you: 46 47 If you don't sign up, you will find you

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 685 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 can't get access to a cement pour, there 2 will be trades you can't access - you won't 3 be able to build. You get that, don't you. 4 5 That's something he said to you? 6 A. Words to that effect, yes. 7 8 Q. And then in paragraph 9 did he say: 9 10 Yep, and there will be all sorts of 11 authorities and officials visiting to check 12 you over and close you down ... 13 14 He said that to you? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. Did you take his comments that you've recorded in 18 paragraphs 7 and 9 to be threats? 19 A. Of course, yes. 20 21 Q. Have you had these kind of threats before in your time 22 as a builder and developer in Canberra? 23 A. It's - yes, similar. I mean, there's usually similar 24 words and threats made like this when you - when you're 25 negotiating something, I suppose. 26 27 Q. At this stage, were you negotiating an EBA with the 28 CFMEU? 29 A. No. Communications had broken down in relation to 30 negotiating the EBA. 31 32 Q. Shortly before this, you had been negotiating an EBA? 33 A. Yes. I think we started negotiating an EBA probably 34 later in 2013. 35 36 Q. How did those negotiations begin? What was the 37 context for them beginning? Was it related to this project 38 or some other project? 39 A. It wasn't related to this project. It would have been 40 related to another project. 41 42 Q. Do you recall -- 43 A. All the projects - I think they wanted a - us to sign 44 a collective agreement, like, to cover all the projects, 45 not site specific anymore. 46 47 Q. Can you tell us a bit about those negotiations? Who

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 686 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 was involved; how did they proceed? 2 A. Basically, we were contacted, I think it would have 3 been in 2013, suggesting that we need to get an EBA 4 executed to cover all the projects. I agreed that I would 5 do that if it was similar to the current site specific EBA 6 that I had, and I think the organiser I was talking to then 7 was Mr Kivalu. So, we had a couple of meetings and, you 8 know, I agreed to go down the path and told him if, you 9 know - I'd sign an EBA, and then he sent through the 10 instrument to be similar to the one that we had and it was 11 similar. I think I had a few questions and I wanted to 12 change a couple of things, but I was unsuccessful. Then 13 I went into the Dickson office with the executed EBA and 14 presented it over the counter there for execution and they 15 told me to - I need to pay an $800 fee. So, I paid that 16 $800 fee. I waited about 20 minutes to half an hour for 17 the agreement to get executed and nobody came out, so the 18 person at the front desk, "Just leave it here, we'll get it 19 executed here and we'll get it over to Fair Work", or 20 whatever they do, and I thanked them and left, basically. 21 22 Probably later in that year, I think it was maybe 23 July, we were advised that the EBA hadn't been registered 24 because it was probably not the instrument that they 25 thought that we should be using. I didn't know exactly 26 what that meant. Then I met with - I think it was - then 27 I think Mr Kivalu sent me over another EBA which was 28 different to the one that I had and then, after that, I had 29 a meeting with Mr Hall and Mr Hamilton in Kingston in 30 relation to going through the new EBA. We had that meeting 31 and basically they said that, you know, they'll give me an 32 EBA that's fairly lenient and used by other builders. 33 I wasn't sure what they meant by that, but we did discuss 34 that we wanted one that was similar to other builders doing 35 similar work to what I was doing, and they forwarded me 36 that agreement via email, I think, and then we went through 37 a period of negotiating the terms of that EBA. 38 39 Q. I see. We are talking about mid-2013 now? 40 A. I believe so. 41 42 Q. You say you went through a period of negotiating the 43 terms of the EBA. How long did that period last for? 44 A. I think it was probably about seven - seven or eight 45 months. I think we had a Christmas in between and a 46 shutdown period, so I think it was about seven or eight 47 months.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 687 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. I take it that the negotiations didn't result in an 3 EBA? 4 A. No. No, they didn't. 5 6 Q. Was there a point at which they concluded? Did you or 7 the CFMEU break the negotiations off and say "no more"? 8 A. I was dealing with Mr Hamilton in relation to some 9 issues and it was moving slowly, I believe, slower than 10 what the Union wanted it to, and then I think it was maybe 11 early March or February 2014, I had a phone call from 12 Mr Hall and he sort of suggested that I needed to get it 13 done, otherwise there could be problems, and then 14 I replied, via email, stating that I - basically that 15 I wasn't prepared to sign the EBA under duress. 16 17 Q. You say "under duress", what do you mean by that? 18 A. I think with the tone of our conversation, when he 19 said there was going to be problems on the work sites, 20 I felt as though if I just went ahead and signed the EBA to 21 avoid those problems, that my employees may not be getting, 22 and the company may not be getting the best result that we 23 were trying to achieve through negotiating the EBA. 24 25 Q. Was it Mr Hall and Mr Harrison who sort of suggested 26 that -- 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Hamilton. 29 30 MR SCRUBY: Q. I'm sorry, Mr Hall and Mr Hamilton who 31 sort of suggested that you needed to get it done but 32 otherwise there could be problems, was it one or other or 33 both? 34 A. I don't recall - I don't recall Mr Hamilton suggesting 35 that, no. Mr Hall - although he did. 36 37 Q. Do you remember what Mr Hall said? 38 A. No, not during that conversation, I don't. 39 40 Q. Was the effect of what he said that you needed to get 41 it done, otherwise there could be problems? 42 A. Yes. Yes. 43 44 Q. Was there -- 45 A. "There will be", I think the words were. 46 47 Q. Did he say what the problems would be or might be?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 688 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I can't recall. 2 3 Q. Can you say briefly what the sticking points were in 4 the negotiation? You'd signed an EBA that you were happy 5 with, then you had been provided with another one. What 6 were the differences between the two and why weren't you 7 happy with them? 8 A. I suppose in relation to negotiations of the points, 9 I had my financial controller and compliance officer going 10 through most of those, but I think one of the clauses which 11 had been negotiated over the phone I think a couple of 12 times, because we didn't have a good understanding of it, 13 could have been clause 9 in relation to contractors and 14 subcontractors. 15 16 Q. I see. What was the difficulty that you had with that 17 clause? 18 A. We didn't understand whether that meant just for our 19 employees only, or whether for all contractors on site. 20 21 Q. I see. Was there a problem if it meant one or the 22 other for you? 23 A. Yes, it would have - if it meant for all contractors 24 on site, it would mean that every trade contractor that 25 we - I felt that it would mean that every trade contractor 26 that we engaged would have to pay their employees the same 27 as what we're paying ours. 28 29 Q. I see. Was that a clause that CFMEU representatives 30 wanted included in the EBA? 31 A. It was part of the EBA. So I suppose, yes, they 32 didn't want - I don't think they wanted to negotiate that 33 one. 34 35 Q. Was that the only sticking point, or were there others 36 in the negotiations? 37 A. There was another 10 or 15 that we were negotiating at 38 the time, but I think - yeah, I think they were in the 39 middle of negotiation when the negotiations broke down. 40 41 Q. I see. So they break down in, what, February or March 42 2014? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Did you hear from Mr Hall until the conversation that 46 you had with him on 26 August 2014? 47 A. No. After the negotiations broke down, I didn't hear

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 689 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 from him for some time. 2 3 Q. So the first time you think you heard from him was 4 when he called you in relation to it? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 MR SCRUBY: I'm not sure I have tendered this document, 8 Commissioner. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: That will be Milin MFI-1. 11 12 MILIN MFI-1 RECORD OF HALL/AMALGAMATED PHONE CONVERSATION 13 14 MR SCRUBY: Q. Just going back to your note of the 15 conversation with Mr Hall, I take it that the note sets out 16 what was said by Mr Hall and what you said, as best you can 17 recall? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. At this time I think you said that -- 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Could I just ask one question 23 about the document, another formal point really: in 24 paragraph 13 you see it says: 25 26 Any negative (media?) publicity. 27 28 Am I right in thinking that Mr Hall didn't actually use the 29 word "media?", but that is the word you have put in to 30 indicate the meaning you were taking from what he was 31 saying; is that correct? Let me put it another way. Why 32 is the word "media?", in italics and round brackets? 33 A. I don't believe the word "media" was used, that's what 34 it means. 35 36 Q. But it appears there because, though it wasn't used, 37 you understood him to be talking about media publicity, is 38 that the position? 39 A. Yes. I wasn't able to capture every word that took 40 place in the conversation, but I felt as though that there 41 was something there in relation to the negative publicity 42 that could have meant media or other things. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Yes, Mr Scruby. 45 46 MR SCRUBY: Q. I'm not sure if you've already said this, 47 but the conversation that you record under the next

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 690 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 heading, that is, "Record of Hall/Amalgamated phone 2 conversation", when did Mr Lemin speak to you about that 3 conversation? 4 A. I believe it was when I contacted him because I'd 5 heard through a colleague that he had been called by the 6 CFMEU. 7 8 Q. Was it after the conversation that you had with 9 Mr Hall on 26 August? 10 A. Yes, it was after. 11 12 Q. Can you say roughly how long after? 13 A. I think - I think it could have been two days. 14 15 Q. I see. After your conversation with Mr Hall on 16 26 August, do you know how long after that conversation 17 that Mr Lemin had a conversation with Mr Hall? 18 A. I don't know. 19 20 Q. Have you had any other conversations with Mr Hall 21 about the Trilogy Project? 22 A. No. 23 24 Q. Have you had any other conversations with anyone from 25 the CFMEU about that project? 26 A. Not that I can recall. 27 28 Q. So no-one has asked you to get an EBA for the project 29 since Mr Hall's conversation on that? 30 A. Mr Kivalu had spoken to me in relation to how it was 31 going along and where I was up to, and he knew that the 32 communications had broken down, but he requested that, you 33 know, if I talked to anybody, that I talk to him. 34 35 Q. And when was this conversation? 36 A. Oh, I'm not - maybe September, I think, something like 37 that. 38 39 Q. And that was the only other conversation, was it? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. You haven't spoken to Mr O'Mara about the Trilogy 43 Project? 44 A. Not about the Trilogy Project. 45 46 Q. Have you spoken to him at all about getting an EBA? 47 A. Yes, via the telephone call.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 691 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. When was that? 3 A. When? 4 5 Q. Yes. 6 A. It would have been the latter half of 2013. 7 8 Q. What did Mr O'Mara say to you? 9 A. Basically, he - basically, Mr Kivalu came into my 10 office to see me and said where I was up to with the EBA, 11 and I advised that I'm not going to negotiate, that I've 12 already signed an EBA and paid for it. I suggested that 13 they register the one that I've signed with Fair Work and 14 he said, you know, "Sorry, you can't do that." And I said, 15 "Well, we don't have any other options", and he advised 16 that "I'm going to have to speak to Mr O'Mara", he's going 17 to have to call him and put me on loudspeaker. So he did 18 that in my office and then Mr O'Mara - O'Mara answered and 19 Mr Kivalu said he's in a meeting with me and he's told me 20 that we need to sign the new agreement but I'm refusing to. 21 22 Then I believe Mr O'Mara, you know, apologised for 23 giving me the previous agreement, saying it wasn't the 24 right instrument, or whatever, "But I've got the correct 25 one now", so, you know, I should go ahead and sign it. 26 I basically said words to the effect, "No, youse have 27 stuffed me around", and this and that, "You're treating us 28 all like a pack of fools", and whatever, and the 29 conversation went in relation to - it started to get a 30 little bit heated, I suppose, and I told him I wouldn't be 31 signing the EBA and, yeah, I think it got a little bit more 32 heated after that, yes. 33 34 Q. I see. You got a little bit more heated? 35 A. We both did. 36 37 Q. How did the conversation conclude? 38 A. He said words to the effect - and I mean, I can't 39 remember them clearly now but he, you know - I think he 40 said - basically, he said - he said, you know, "You will be 41 signing. You're a fucking smart-arse", and this, 42 et cetera, and, "You're going to sign the fucking EBA", and 43 I said, "You get fucked, you fat" - and then I think 44 Mr Kivalu or Mr O'Mara hung up the phone. 45 46 Q. I see. Do you actually have an EBA at the moment? 47 A. Yes.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 692 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. How was that concluded? 3 A. Basically, I expressed some concern with our lawyers 4 and with the MBA. They advised me that if I wanted my 5 employees to have an EBA, that they could still go down 6 that path and get an EBA for the employees, and that, you 7 know, the CFMEU didn't have to be involved if the workers 8 didn't want them to represent them. 9 10 Q. When did the process of getting an EBA via that means 11 finish? 12 A. I think we had an EBA registered late last year, 13 I think it was, or earlier. Yes, I think it was late last 14 year, I think. 15 16 Q. I see. Have you heard from anyone from the CFMEU 17 since that time? 18 A. I have had some missed calls and some voice messages 19 left on my phone, yes. 20 21 Q. Have you actually had a conversation with anyone from 22 the CFMEU since the conclusion of your EBA? 23 A. No. 24 25 Q. I was asking you about the IQ Apartments project. You 26 set out in your statement some discussions you had with 27 Mr Hall or Mr O'Mara in relation to that project. I won't 28 take you through all of those, but could I ask you about 29 paragraph 18. There is a reference there to the CFMEU 30 wanting to go with Construction Control. Do you know 31 whether Construction Control had an EBA with the CFMEU? 32 A. I don't know. 33 34 Q. Could I ask you about paragraph 19. I won't take you 35 through it all. In, I think, the fourth-last line, you 36 record Mr Hall as saying: 37 38 It is important that we deal with a builder 39 who has experience dealing with a death on 40 building sites. We don't want that coming 41 back on me or the Union if somebody dies. 42 43 Do you see that? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. Was this IQ Apartments project a particularly or 47 unusually dangerous one?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 693 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I don't think, no. 2 3 Q. What did you understand Mr Hall's concern to be? 4 A. I understood if there was a death on site, that he 5 wanted to have the comfort of a builder who knew how to, 6 I suppose, protect the principal. 7 8 Q. At this stage you were contemplating doing the 9 building work? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. Was the possibility of there being a death on site 13 something that you thought likely at this stage? 14 A. I didn't think it was likely, no. 15 16 Q. Can I ask it in this way: was it any different from 17 any other project that you have undertaken as a builder in 18 relation to that issue? 19 A. No. 20 21 Q. Could I come then to the Easty Street Project. This 22 is a project that was built in 2013? 23 A. It commenced in 2013, yes. 24 25 Q. I won't take you through everything you say about it, 26 but in paragraph 26 you say that you had discussions with 27 Mr Seselja about the final choice of contractor, and during 28 one discussion you asked him: 29 30 "Does Advanced Plumbing have an EBA?" 31 32 And he said, "No", and then you said: 33 34 "We might have problems then." 35 36 Why did you say "We might have problems then"? 37 A. Well, basically, when you engage a contractor that 38 doesn't have an EBA, the Union usually raises that with you 39 and either requests that we have a contractor that does 40 have an EBA, or get the particular contractor signed up. 41 42 Q. When you say "the Union", you are referring here to - 43 well, what Union are you referring to? 44 A. The CFMEU. 45 46 Q. Would Advanced Plumbing be dealing with them or with 47 the CEPU?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 694 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I'm not sure. 2 3 Q. At any rate, when you were referring to problems, you 4 were talking about the CFMEU? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. At paragraph 30, you give some evidence about the 8 Moore Street project. Again, I am not going to take you 9 through all of this, but tell me if this is right: were 10 you, yourself, present on the site on any of the occasions 11 that you refer to in your statement; that is, 21 April? 12 A. I wasn't there on 21 April, no. 13 14 MR AGIUS: He says he was at the Gold Coast, the first 15 line. 16 17 MR SCRUBY: Thank you. All right. Nothing further, 18 Commissioner. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: The hearing will resume at a quarter to 21 12. 22 23 SHORT ADJOURNMENT 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius, I imagine you will need some 26 instructions on the oral evidence that was elicited this 27 morning? 28 29 MR AGIUS: Yes. Commissioner, we won't be able to 30 complete our cross-examination if we started today in the 31 absence of instructions, and we will need to search for 32 documents. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I understand that. It seemed to 35 me that it might be better, instead of having the 36 cross-examination split into two, some today and more 37 later, it would be better to have it all in one go at some 38 convenient time. 39 40 Q. Mr Milin, are you generally available in the next few 41 working days? For example, are you available on Monday or 42 Tuesday of next week? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. It will be possible for you 46 to come back? Mr Agius is entitled to ask you questions. 47 When he arrived this morning, he thought he was going to be

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 695 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 asking you questions about your statement. You have given 2 quite a lot of oral evidence which may have come as news to 3 to him, to some extent, he needs to speak to Mr Hall and 4 people like that. 5 6 I think the position he is taking up is a reasonable 7 one. So, as long as you can come back at a later time, 8 which will be worked out as conveniently as possible, is 9 what will happen. 10 11 Is there anything more that needs to be said on this, 12 Mr Agius? 13 14 MR AGIUS: Commissioner, I understand with the greatest of 15 respect there are efficiencies in issue here, but if that 16 is to happen -- 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Efficiencies? 19 20 MR AGIUS: Efficiencies, yes. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 23 24 MR AGIUS: If that is to happen, can I be permitted to put 25 on the record that we - and I would have cross-examined on 26 our case - deny certain things that this witness has said 27 in his statement. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 30 31 MR AGIUS: If there is to be reporting of what this 32 witness said, then perhaps those who are reporting it ought 33 to understand that we deny the conversation in the last 34 four lines of paragraph 10. We deny the conversation about 35 "being important to deal with a builder who has experience 36 with dealing with a death on building sites". 37 38 THE COMMISSIONER: That is paragraph 19, the last five 39 lines or so. 40 41 MR AGIUS: Paragraph 19. We have an alternate, a 42 different version of that conversation. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 45 46 MR AGIUS: My client takes those matters very seriously. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 696 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 2 3 MR AGIUS: It is very concerned for its reputation and, 4 quite frankly, regards the notion that is set out in those 5 three lines in paragraph 19 as entirely abhorrent. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. They presumably also wish to say 8 that as to the oral evidence this morning, that may or may 9 not be denied, you are just investigating it. 10 11 MR AGIUS: I have just an outline of instructions in 12 relation to it. I think my friend put on the record that 13 the Commission only had notice of that evidence this 14 morning. We only had notice of it when we heard it in the 15 witness box, and it ought not to be assumed that it won't 16 be challenged, but it would be unfair of me to make any 17 comment about it in the absence of instructions, and 18 I won't do so otherwise. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: I think your position is covered. 21 22 MR CHIN: May I say something, Commissioner? 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 25 26 MR CHIN: Lest there be any criticism of Mr Milin, 27 Mr Milin's written statement provided the Commission, can 28 I affirm, was faithfully responsive to inquiries or 29 questions put to Mr Milin by the Commission, and any 30 additional evidence elicited this morning beyond Mr Milin's 31 statement was something about which we had no prior notice 32 in relation to either the Notices to Produce that were 33 received by Mr Milin, and the parties whom I represent, or 34 the requests for a written statement directed to any of the 35 individuals whom I represent. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thank you. Mr Milin, you can 38 leave the witness box now and, as I say, some attempt will 39 be made to get a time convenient to everyone for you to 40 return. Thank you for coming today. 41 42 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 43 44

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 697 D MILIN (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 MR SCRUBY: Yes. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: The next witness is? 4 5 MR SCRUBY: Mr Merhi. 6 7

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 698 M MERHI (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. In paragraph 7 you refer to another occasion when 3 Mr Poskus and Mr Hanford visited the site. You give some 4 evidence about a conversation that you had with them. Did 5 either of those gentlemen raise any safety issues in 6 relation to the site? 7 A. Yes, they did. 8 9 Q. Doing the best you can, what were those safety issues? 10 A. Well, they come on site, we met, I met Dan for the 11 first time. Went on site. They wanted to do a safety 12 walk. Went up on the scaffold. They weren't too happy 13 because I didn't have kickboards up against the scaffold. 14 They weren't too happy with bricks being on the scaffold 15 because of the walkway, but at that time I had brickies. 16 The next day - they were loading that afternoon, the next 17 day to lay bricks, but there was still a clear walkway. 18 Going back to not having kickboards, they weren't too 19 happy. I said, "No worries, I've got scaffolders". I made 20 a phone call to come out that afternoon to make sure we put 21 the kickboards on and that was it. And then they brought 22 up the front entry about the gravel, just it was a bit 23 muddy, which they weren't too happy with, so, I mean it 24 wasn't bad but, you know, I did get it done what they 25 asked. 26 27 Q. What did they ask you to do? 28 A. They want a clean walkway to our site sheds, to our 29 lunch rooms and that. 30 31 Q. You took steps to ensure that was done, did you? 32 A. Yes. No, I did that every afternoon with the bobcat. 33 34 MR SCRUBY: Thank you, Commissioner. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Docking, do you have any 37 questions? 38 39 MR DOCKING: Yes, Commissioner. 40 41

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 699 M MERHI (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. No, I think what Mr Docking is 2 asking is this: your statement is dated 13 July 2015 and 3 your account of the conversations is written down there. 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. He wants to know whether that was the first time that 7 your memory of those conversations was written down? 8 A. Yes. Yes, when I first met Luke, yes. 9 10 MR DOCKING: Q. I just want to suggest to you - look at 11 your own statement, paragraph 5 -- 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. -- you are mistaken, that Mr Poskus did not say words 15 like, "I'm from Sydney. Do you mind if I look around the 16 job?"? 17 A. No. Yes, he did say that. 18 19 Q. I also suggest to you you're mistaken, he did not say 20 anything like, "I have heard that the plumbers are unhappy 21 with their boss"? 22 A. Yes, he did say that. 23 24 Q. What he actually said is what you said to 25 Counsel Assisting today, he just asked about what 26 contractors were on site? 27 A. Well, he came to site. He introduced himself and 28 that. He told me he was from Sydney, he was a Union 29 plumber, "What contractors are on site?" I told him. "Can 30 we do a walk around the site?" I said, "That's fine". 31 Then we started talking and then he says to me about the 32 plumbers, that he's heard the plumbers aren't happy, some 33 of his employees. 34 35 Q. I suggest you are mistaken about the last part, about 36 him making any comment about plumbers being unhappy? 37 A. No, I'm not, mate, that's what he said. 38 39 Q. I then go to your paragraph 7. 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. Can I suggest to you that you're the one who invited 43 him to go for a safety walk and that led to an agreement 44 between you two, that one could take place? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. And it would be right to say that you, personally,

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 700 M MERHI (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 during that process were friendly and accommodating? 2 A. Yes. No, they were friendly, yes. 3 4 Q. And you didn't feel intimidated in the slightest by 5 him -- 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. -- entering, by agreement, into having a look at the 9 site? 10 A. No. No, no. 11 12 Q. No threats were ever made to you by any CEPU official 13 at the time? 14 A. No. No. 15 16 Q. Can you just explain why it's important to have the 17 kickboards in place as part of the handrailing system and 18 the general fall protection system? 19 A. Well, to have the kickboard up against that scaffold, 20 where you've got your mesh guard as well as that, in case 21 anything falls off on the scaffold, it could land on 22 someone, so it's always good to have your kickboard up 23 against the scaffold, but then you speak to your 24 scaffolders and say your mesh guard can include as well as 25 that, being a kickboard as well as that, you know, with the 26 mesh guard. 27 28 Q. For the overall system, the components have to include 29 both the kickboard, the mid-rail and a handrail? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Without all of those components, it is unsafe? 33 A. Well, no, because you can have - your mesh guard can 34 include as being a kickboard or you can say where they want 35 the planks turned up as a kickboard, and that's what they 36 wanted, and I done what they wanted. 37 38 Q. You had no problem with that? 39 A. No. No. 40 41 Q. I think construction sites can be fairly dynamic 42 day-to-day and assistance of that type, to make the site as 43 reasonably practicable, is appreciated? 44 A. Yeah. No, no, it is. 45 46 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 701 M MERHI (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Docking. Mr Agius, any 2 questions? 3 4 MR AGIUS: No. 5 6 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Morison? 7 8 MR MORISON: No. Thank you, Commissioner. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin? 11 12 MR CHIN: Yes, Commissioner, if I may, just briefly. 13 14

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 702 M MERHI (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. No, not that I recall. No. 2 3 Q. And to what extent was the gravel section muddy? Was 4 it excessively muddy, or what? 5 A. No. I mean, it's a job site. It's going to get 6 muddy, but not muddy where you can't walk or you're going 7 to slip, or you're going to hurt yourself, or where you 8 can't walk into your shed or your lunchroom, you know, so - 9 I mean, it gets cleaned up every afternoon. 10 11 Q. Yes. Now, can I ask you about the scaffolding. You 12 mentioned there was a concern expressed by, I think, 13 Mr Poskus or Mr Hanford about the toe board in the 14 scaffolding, do you remember that? 15 A. The kickboard, yes. 16 17 Q. Was there any criticism or concern expressed about 18 handrails not being present? 19 A. Not that I recall, no. 20 21 Q. Is it the case that you rang the scaffolders whilst 22 the Union representatives were present to ask about the 23 toe boards being implemented? 24 A. Yeah, I did what they mentioned. 25 26 Q. Did you stop any people from using the scaffolding 27 whilst you were contacting the scaffolders? 28 A. No. 29 30 Q. Why not? 31 A. I didn't need to. 32 33 Q. Were you asked by the Union to stop people from using 34 the scaffolding? 35 A. No. 36 37 Q. Did you show Mr Poskus the work health and safety 38 management plan for the site? 39 A. Yes, he came in to our office and just wanted to have 40 a look at some of the paperwork, yes. 41 42 Q. Did he say anything about it? Did he have any 43 criticisms about that plan? 44 A. No. 45 46 MR CHIN: Thank you, Commissioner. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 703 M MERHI (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin. Mr Scruby, anything else? 2 3 MR SCRUBY: No, Commissioner. 4 5 THE COMMISSIONER: There is no objection, I presume, to 6 Mr Merhi being excused? 7 8 Mr Merhi, you were brought here by a summons to give 9 evidence. You are excused from further attendance on that 10 summons. Thank you for giving up your time to come along. 11 12 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: You may leave the witness box. 15 16

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 704 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 I direct that that address not be published. 2 STATEMENT OF MICAH JOHN BEAUMONT DATED 14/07/2015 3 4 MR SCRUBY: Q. Mr Beaumont, in paragraph 4 of your 5 statement, you say that you have a range of other high-risk 6 licences. Could you identify those licences, please? 7 A. I have an elevated work platform licence. I've been 8 trained in a dogman's, rigger's and tower crane ticket. 9 I also have a skid steer certificate, an excavator 10 certificate, explosive power tools. 11 12 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 6 and following, you set out 13 in some detail your recollection of events in relation to 14 the Moore Street project. I am not going to take you 15 through all of that but I just wanted to ask you some 16 questions. In paragraph 9, you say that you made some 17 notes in the site diary in relation to the CFMEU's visit. 18 Could I take you to the notes you made for 21 April. 19 They're at page 9 of your statement. Do you have those 20 there? 21 A. Page 9 or -- 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Yes. On the bottom right-hand 24 corner of each page, there is a numeral. 25 A. Oh, sorry, yes. 26 27 Q. He wants you to look at 9. 28 A. Yes. 29 30 MR SCRUBY: Q. The notes for that day record about 31 halfway down: 32 33 CFMEU on site. 4 blokes came and tried to 34 stop the pour. 35 36 Was that something that someone from the CFMEU said? Did 37 they say "stop the pour"? 38 A. They were leading to trying to stop the pour, yes. 39 40 Q. Can you just explain that? 41 A. Yes. There was one occasion where I said, "You're not 42 stopping me", and he said, "Well, we'll see." 43 44 Q. When you say "he said", who -- 45 A. Tony Vitler, sorry. 46 47 Q. Is this record in your site diary a reference to that?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 705 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. I see. In paragraph 14, you refer to Mr Smith 4 handing you a safety notice. I just wanted to understand 5 at what point that happened. Did it happen before you had 6 any discussions about safety? 7 A. Yes, it did. 8 9 Q. If we could go to that notice -- 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: Page 11. 12 13 MR SCRUBY: Q. It is page 11. Did you have a discussion 14 with anyone from the CFMEU about the contents of this 15 notice? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. What was said about "delineation/barrier between 19 plant" and I think it's "scaffold"? 20 A. They said that you don't have delineation between the 21 plant and scaffold and I said that "You're wrong, I do." I 22 have a 600 high vertical slab with a 2 metre buffer from 23 the scaffolding. 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. When you say "600 high", you mean 26 600 mm? 27 A. 600 mm high slab, yes, which, in my view, at the time, 28 that was sufficient barrier. 29 30 MR SCRUBY: Q. As you understood it, what was it that 31 the CFMEU wanted you to do in relation to delineation of 32 the barrier? 33 A. As I understood it at the time, they required me to 34 install concrete barriers to protect the scaffolding which, 35 I believed, I had a quite substantial concrete barrier in 36 place, being the slab. 37 38 Q. The second item is - I think it says "Total traffic 39 management plan in place and adhered to". Were there 40 discussions about the traffic management plan? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. What was said about that? 44 A. They seemed to think that I wasn't - I didn't have a 45 traffic management plan and if I did, I wasn't adhering to 46 it and that, in their opinion, they seemed to think 47 I needed more traffic controllers, but I was just operating

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 706 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 to an approved temporary traffic management plan that TTM's 2 had done up for us. 3 4 Q. How many traffic controllers did you have? 5 A. I had two, but I did in fact request another traffic 6 controller from one of our other sites because I saw the 7 CFMEU's actions outside the site were very disruptive to a 8 high-risk activity. So about a quarter to 10, I had a 9 third traffic controller arrive. 10 11 Q. Is this right, the approved temporary traffic 12 management plan required two traffic controllers? 13 A. Two. And my ticketed traffic controllers were acting 14 as per that TTM. 15 16 Q. I see. But you later got a third? 17 A. Correct, yes. 18 19 Q. Because you thought you needed one? 20 A. My viewing over the site of the scaffolding, in 21 viewing over the side of the scaffolding, I saw 22 Johnny Lomax and Dusty Miller talking to my traffic 23 controllers. I saw it as distracting them, constant 24 filming them, so I saw that - it was quite disruptive so 25 I requested a third person just to help control the traffic 26 correctly. 27 28 Q. The third item in that notice, I think it says 29 "Formwork altered after sign-off"? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Were there discussions about that? 33 A. Yes, there was. They seemed to think that a 34 formworker nailing a hob, which is a structure - it is an 35 aesthetic piece of timber that holds a raised piece of 36 concrete on the slab, what had happened, the concreters had 37 stood on it and it had moved down slightly, so they were 38 just installing a couple more nails just to secure that 39 aesthetic piece of concrete. They seemed to think that it 40 was structural and why I was adjusting formwork after a 41 formwork engineer had signed it off, which I strongly 42 disagreed with. 43 44 Q. And that's something that you said to them? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. The last item seems to say "Scaffolding blocked". Was

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 707 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 there discussion about blocked scaffolding? 2 A. Yes. So that was the finishing machines, the 3 helicopters that were that morning placed off the slab and 4 on the scaffolding, just to not impede the pouring of the 5 slab. Because I had two accesses to the slab, I didn't 6 believe it affected the access or egress of that particular 7 slab pour. 8 9 Q. We have been provided with some photographs taken by 10 CFMEU officials on the day. 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. I can't tell you who is the author of the comments in 14 the middle column, but can I just ask you about the 15 pictures. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Do you want this to be marked as an 18 exhibit? 19 20 MR SCRUBY: Yes, I tender that. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: That will be known as Beaumont MFI-1. 23 The provenance is that Mr Agius gave you these photographs. 24 25 MR SCRUBY: They were provided yesterday, yes, by the 26 CFMEU. 27 28 BEAUMONT MFI-1 PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY CFMEU OFFICIALS 29 ON 21/07/2015 30 31 MR SCRUBY: Q. The comment in relation to the first 32 picture is, "Seems to be formwork making modifications 33 after engineer sign off." That's the evidence about the 34 formwork that you gave a moment ago? 35 A. Correct. 36 37 Q. Does that record what you describe as the - I think 38 you said - aesthetic -- 39 A. Yes, the non-structural element of the formwork, yes. 40 41 Q. The second picture says, "Worker under concrete pump". 42 Were there discussions about workers being under concrete 43 pumps on the site? 44 A. Yes, there was. 45 46 Q. What was said about that? 47 A. They seemed to think that you can never have anyone

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 708 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 underneath a concrete boom and they proceeded to take 2 photos of it. 3 4 Q. Were there people underneath the concrete pump on the 5 site? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. Was that during pumping, or before it, or some other 9 time? 10 A. That was prior to pumping. We normally stretch out 11 the pump just to make sure it can reach and then when we 12 start pumping, the Gungahlin Concrete Service in their SWMS 13 it states that they have to have a spotter to avoid anyone 14 standing under the boom, unnecessary work under the boom. 15 16 Q. I see. Do you know if that actually happened, 17 that is, did they have a spotter? 18 A. Yes, they did. 19 20 Q. I see. 21 A. As per their SWMS. 22 23 Q. Did the SWMS have requirements about what the 24 procedure would be when there was no pumping? 25 A. No, no, not to my knowledge. 26 27 Q. I see. There have been some statements put on by 28 Mr Smith and Mr Vitler of the CFMEU and they both say that 29 they saw someone standing under the boom during the pour. 30 Did you see anyone standing under the boom during the pour? 31 A. Yes. I mean, to pour a slab there's got to be a 32 hoseman and then there's got to be the screeders and 33 finishers, so, to my best knowledge, the legislation states 34 that you have to avoid working under the boom. It doesn't 35 say "never" because if you were never under the boom, you 36 wouldn't be able to pour the slab. 37 38 Q. I see. Going over to the second page, there's another 39 picture with a description in relation to workers being 40 under the concrete pump and then the one beneath that says, 41 "Scaffold walkway obstructed". Is that the issue that you 42 referred to a few minutes ago about the helicopters? 43 A. Yes, correct. 44 45 Q. So they were moved, were they? 46 A. They were moved within a minute of Tony Vitler 47 expressing his concern about it.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 709 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Then over on the next page, the first picture shows a 3 group of workers and then the description is, "Gathering of 4 workers, numbers lean towards numbers not adding up to 5 workers being inducted on to site." 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Do you understand what that means, 8 "Gathering of workers, numbers lean towards numbers not 9 adding up to workers being inducted on to site"? What does 10 that mean? I understand what "Gathering of workers" means. 11 Does it mean there were more workers in the photograph than 12 are recorded as having been inducted on to the site, is 13 that the proposition? Do you understand what it means? 14 A. Yes, that's correct, yes. 15 16 Q. Right. 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. Was it true? 20 A. Correct, yes. Yes. We'd inducted them into our site 21 induction but they hadn't signed into their site specific 22 SWMS. 23 24 Q. So they had been inducted but they hadn't been fully 25 recorded? 26 A. They had been inducted - well, they'd been recorded on 27 our site attendance list on the day. They'd also been 28 recorded on their toolbox talk on the day, but when they 29 were inducted possibly a month prior, it's Gungahlin's 30 responsibility, Milin are supposed to check that they have 31 signed into their site specific SWMS and two of the 12 32 hadn't been, yes. 33 34 MR SCRUBY: Q. Is this right, the second picture on that 35 page is that a picture of - well, you tell me what that is 36 a picture of? 37 A. That is in fact a picture of the Gungahlin SWMS with 38 the 10 employees signed in but not the 12 that were in the 39 picture. 40 41 Q. Were steps taken to address this issue? 42 A. Yes. What we agreed with WorkSafe is that we'd 43 re-induct everyone on-site, two by two, not to affect the 44 pour too much and that happened on the day. 45 46 Q. The last picture on that page is of two individuals. 47 Do you know who they are?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 710 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. One is Zvonimir Seselja and the other one is 2 Jason Hooper. 3 4 Q. The person on the left is Mr Hooper; is that right? 5 A. Correct. 6 7 Q. The comment is, "PPE on construction manager". Do you 8 know what that refers to? 9 A. I think that refers to his shoes not being steelcaps. 10 11 Q. That is, Mr Seselja's shoes? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. I see. What's the issue there, do you know? 15 A. I don't know. The fact that he's not on-site is 16 probably the biggest point. The other point is that we can 17 have visitors on-site with non steel-capped shoes if they 18 aren't performing manual work, as long as they are a 19 stiff-soled boot with a leather upper. So, I mean, as far 20 as I'm concerned, that's fine, particularly that he's 21 outside the site. 22 23 Q. Did Mr Seselja perform manual work? 24 A. No. 25 26 Q. If you go over to the next page, there's a picture 27 taken from outside the site that shows a concrete truck and 28 the boom and the comment is, "No barriers for public". Do 29 you know what that refers to? 30 A. Oh, I can only guess, but all I can say -- 31 32 Q. Don't guess if you don't know. 33 A. Well, I mean, "No barriers for public" means there's 34 no barrier between a truck and the public but, I mean, we 35 were doing as per our temporary traffic management plan. 36 37 Q. Were there discussions with CFMEU officials about the 38 need for a barrier? 39 A. No, not to my recollection, no. 40 41 Q. Then the next picture is of a person and the comment 42 is, "Unidentified visitor to site, PPE?" Do you know who 43 that person is? 44 A. Yes, yes, that's Joe, our architect. 45 46 Q. Is the reference to "PPE" also a reference to his 47 footwear?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 711 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Oh, and the fact that he hasn't got high-vis or a 2 hard hat on, but I didn't witness Joe going on-site. 3 4 Q. I see. The last picture on that page the comment is, 5 "Traffic controller looking the wrong way??" Was there 6 discussion about what the traffic controller was doing? 7 A. No. 8 9 Q. And then over the page, the final picture, it seems to 10 be a picture of another or perhaps the same traffic 11 controller and it says, "No spotter to guide concrete truck 12 on to pump". Was there a discussion about that issue? 13 A. No. 14 15 Q. Do you know what it is referring to? 16 A. Yes. Normally we have someone that backs the truck 17 up. Generally, it's the other agi driver that's already on 18 the pump. If it's not him, it's the pump operator that 19 sounds his horn. 20 21 Q. I'm not going to take you through all of these 22 paragraphs, but at paragraph 25 you say that after showing 23 compliance records, you said some words to the CFMEU 24 representatives and then you asked them to leave. And then 25 you say that on viewing the notice that we've looked at at 26 page 11 of your statement, you formed the view that they 27 didn't have a proper right to remain under the Fair Work 28 Act, "as I thought they were making things up to try to 29 disrupt or stop the concrete pour ..." You've given some 30 evidence about discussions in relation to safety issues 31 that you had. Had those discussions concluded by this time 32 or did they happen after this? 33 A. Yes, their complaints had concluded, yes. 34 35 Q. Had you done everything you thought needed to be done 36 to address those complaints? 37 A. Yes, I believed so. 38 39 MR SCRUBY: In paragraph 28 you refer to your call to the 40 Gungahlin police station. We've got some audio recording 41 of that and I'd like to play that, if I may, Commissioner. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 44 45 (Audio recording played and transcript displayed) 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Mr Beaumont, that phone number you

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 712 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 gave, is that your current phone number? 2 A. Correct. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: I direct that that phone number not be 5 published. Do you want this tendered? 6 7 MR SCRUBY: Yes, Commissioner. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: The tape and the transcript of it will 10 be together Beaumont MFI-2. 11 12 BEAUMONT MFI-2 TAPE RECORDING AND ACCOMPANYING TRANSCRIPT 13 OF MR BEAUMONT'S CALL TO GUNGAHLIN POLICE STATION 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. I have one matter to correct or 16 raise for your consideration, Mr Beaumont. That call came 17 through at 7.32, apparently. 18 A. Mmm-hmm. 19 20 Q. Therefore, is it right to say that in paragraph 28, 21 line 1, when you said "at about 8am", in one sense that's 22 true, but having examined the transcript and heard the 23 record, it should really say "at about 7.32"? 24 A. Yes, that would be correct. I've in fact got an arrow 25 on my statement from Tony Davey and Zvonimir Seselja 26 turning up at 7.45. I've realised that that might not be - 27 that might be closer to 7.30 than 8. 28 29 Q. Yes, that clears up an otherwise possible 30 contradiction. 31 A. Yes. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Scruby. 34 35 MR SCRUBY: Q. Can I ask you this, Mr Beaumont, if you 36 go back to paragraph 11 of your statement -- 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. -- you say there that Mr Vitler, Mr Lomax and Mr Smith 40 arrived at approximately 7.20? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. Is it right that they arrived at about 10 minutes 44 before you called -- 45 A. Yes. It's hard to say at the time, but yes, it might 46 have been closer to 7 than 7.20, but I didn't take note of 47 the time, yes.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 713 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. In paragraph 12, you give some times for the arrival 3 of Mr Miller and Mr Hamilton. 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Did they both arrive after you called the police? 7 A. After I called the police, yes, to my best 8 recollection, yes. 9 10 Q. In the call you're heard saying: 11 12 Don't get on there, don't get on there at 13 all, no, don't. 14 15 You'll see that on the transcript in front of you in a 16 minute. 17 A. Mmm. 18 19 Q. Do you remember what you were referring to there? 20 A. No. At the time there was a lot happening. 21 22 Q. You told the police officer that you spoke to that - 23 well, you said: 24 25 They're being real aggressive. 26 27 What were you referring to? 28 A. Oh, it was - it was escalating. They were walking 29 around trying to disrupt the concrete pumper, the man that 30 was in control of the concrete pump, asking him questions 31 like, "Are you happy with the set up?" "What's your 32 licence?", and what not. A gentleman from 33 Gungahlin Concrete had an argument. He didn't like the 34 fact that they were constantly filming. He seemed to think 35 that they needed his approval to film them, so, in my view, 36 at the time I could see things escalating and I was - I was 37 worried about it escalating to violence, so I called the 38 police. 39 40 Q. Was anyone being aggressive towards you? 41 A. Body-language aggressive, yes, pointing, yelling, 42 raised voice. 43 44 Q. Can you just explain what you mean by that? Who was 45 doing that? 46 A. Mainly Tony and Zach. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 714 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. You say yelling and a raised voice. What were they 2 yelling? 3 A. The first complaint was, "You need a handrail on the 4 stairs", but that was yelled. I said, "Why are you here?" 5 And they said, "You need a bloody handrail on them stairs. 6 You can't do this. This is bullshit, you know." And I'm 7 like - before, knowing them previously, they'd never been 8 like that with me and I saw it as aggressive behaviour, 9 because I've had dealings with them before and they've 10 never been like that. 11 12 Q. In paragraph 32 of your statement you refer to 13 Mr Smith and Mr Vitler being in the site office. Mr Smith 14 in his statement says that he asked you to show him the 15 sign-in sheet and that you refused? 16 A. Yes, I'd - that's correct. 17 18 Q. Why did you refuse? 19 A. Because previously I'd given them all the 20 documentation I believed necessary to conduct the pour. 21 The sign-in sheet in fact was in that document. 22 23 Q. What, so you had given them the sign-in sheet? 24 A. Yes. I'd given them a look at my pre-pour checklist 25 and the sign-in sheet was in that paperwork. 26 27 Q. Did you say to Mr Smith something to the effect of, 28 "No, you can't see the sign-in sheet"? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. But you'd given it to him? 32 A. Previously, yes. 33 34 Q. Why did you say "No" if you'd given it to him? 35 A. They kept requesting paperwork and I viewed them as 36 trespassers, so I didn't view that they had a right to see 37 any more paperwork and as far as I was concerned, I was 38 waiting for the police to remove them. 39 40 Q. In paragraph 32 you refer to another notice that you 41 were given and that appears at page 12 of your statement. 42 A. Mmm-hmm. Yes. 43 44 Q. I think we've dealt with the first item raised on that 45 document in relation to induction. The second item says, 46 I think, "Cannot locate site safety management plan." Was 47 there a discussion about locating the site safety

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 715 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 management plan? 2 A. Yes, there was. Colin seemed to not be able to find 3 it in our site safety plans in the safety office, but a 4 short time later he, in fact, found it in behind some other 5 SWMS. 6 7 Q. Who is Colin? 8 A. Colin is our safety officer on-site. 9 10 Q. What's his full name? 11 A. Burson, Colin Burson. 12 13 Q. You said he found it a short time later. Was that 14 before the CFMEU left the site? 15 A. Yes, oh yes. That is, in fact, how they picked up 16 that they had 10 signed in and 12 on-site, because of that 17 document. 18 19 Q. So was this document provided to you after the site 20 safety management plan had been located? I say that 21 because the first point says, "Workers not correctly 22 inducted"? 23 A. Mmm. No, it would have been prior. 24 25 Q. So you might have the chronology a bit wrong there? 26 A. Mmm. 27 28 Q. You're saying "Mm", I think you mean "Yes"? 29 A. Yes, sorry. 30 31 Q. The third point says, "No electrician on-site 32 (possible)". Were there discussions about that? 33 A. Yes, there was. 34 35 Q. What was said about that? 36 A. I said, "There is an electrician on-site." 37 38 Q. Where was he? 39 A. He was on the deck. 40 41 Q. Did you point him out to the CFMEU officials? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. I take it that was after you were provided with this 45 notice? 46 A. Yes. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 716 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. The last point says, "No adequate first-aid facility". 2 Was there a discussion about that? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. What was said about that? 6 A. They seemed to think that I needed a first-aid bed and 7 a specific designated first-aid shed. 8 9 Q. What did you say about that? 10 A. I said, "No, I don't", I disagreed, only because I had 11 WorkSafe out two days before inspecting the first-aid 12 facilities. 13 14 Q. What did WorkSafe say about the first-aid facilities? 15 A. They were more than happy with the facilities. 16 17 Q. Who was it from WorkSafe that came out? 18 A. It was - I think it was Michael, I can't remember his 19 last name, but he came out with Alan Chipperfield. 20 21 Q. Just moving through your statement, after WorkSafe 22 officials arrived there were some discussions with them and 23 then they - I'm looking at paragraph 45. 24 A. Mmm-hmm. 25 26 Q. They left the site at about 9.45. Did they conduct an 27 inspection of the site? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. They advised you that you'd get an Improvement Notice 31 for not having two concreters signed in to the SWMS. By 32 that stage had the concreters been inducted or was that 33 something that -- 34 A. Yes, they had. By that stage we had re-inducted all 35 of Gungahlin's staff on-site at the time. The 36 Improvement Notice, when we received it, actually just 37 stated that we had incomplete SWMS for Gungahlin Concrete, 38 "Incomplete" meaning that we had a 2013 date on one of the 39 documents in the SWMS and the table of contents didn't have 40 all of the table of contents in it, so, in my view, a 41 trivial sort of an Improvement Notice which we were 42 relatively happy with. 43 44 Q. The Improvement Notice is Annexure D to Mr Milin's 45 statement, page 97. I wonder if that could be brought up 46 on the screen? Do you have that on the screen in front of 47 you? I can give you a hard copy if you need it.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 717 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes, no, I've got it here. 2 3 Q. You've got a hard copy of it with you? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. That notice says that the work health and safety plan 7 submitted to the principal contractor from Gungahlin is 8 incomplete. 9 A. Mmm. 10 11 Q. Is that the same thing as not inducting people into 12 the site? 13 A. It could be, yes. 14 15 Q. I'm just looking at paragraph 45 of your statement 16 where you record that the officials advise you that you'll 17 get a notice for not having the two concreters signed in? 18 A. Yes. At the time that's what I thought we were going 19 to receive the Improvement Notice for. 20 21 Q. That's what they told you? 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. I see. 25 A. Yes. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Just for completeness, that 28 question of non-inducted workers is dealt with in 29 Annexure C to Mr Milin's statement, which also comes from 30 WorkSafe. Do you see in the third paragraph? It is 31 page 95 of Mr Milin's statement. 32 33 MR SCRUBY: Yes. 34 35 Q. Have you got Annexure C of Mr Milin's statement? 36 A. No. 37 38 MR SCRUBY: Could that be brought up? 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: It's on the screen now. 41 42 MR SCRUBY: Q. Have you seen these notes before? 43 A. No. Is it on the screen? 44 45 Q. Yes. 46 A. Mr Milin's statement? 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 718 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. What you've got on the screen is 2 Annexure C to Mr Milin's statement and do you see the third 3 paragraph down? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. "We are getting all non-inducted workers"? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 MR SCRUBY: Q. I think you've already said that WorkSafe 10 arranged with you a process whereby the concreters would be 11 inducted two by two. And then on this notice it says, 12 "Other Matters Arising: 13 14 Gungahlin Concrete Pumping work health and 15 safety was incomplete. 16 17 That's the subject of the Improvement Notice? 18 A. I believe so, yes. 19 20 Q. What steps, if any, were taken to make that work 21 health and safety complete? 22 A. So Colin Burson, my safety officer, chased up 23 Gungahlin Concrete in that hour and requested them on-site 24 to rectify their SWMS. 25 26 Q. How long did that take? 27 A. It took that day and the next day. There was a couple 28 of documents that he had to chase up, so they did that and 29 then we promptly contacted Alan Chipperfield to inspect and 30 remove the Improvement Notice. 31 32 Q. The next item relates to the delineation between plant 33 and scaffolding being insufficient. It says: 34 35 Concrete barriers have been placed by 36 Milin Builders. 37 38 That's the same issue that the CFMEU raised in their first 39 notice? 40 A. Correct. 41 42 Q. Was the position that WorkSafe agreed that there 43 needed to be further delineation? 44 A. On the day, yes, his site note did say that but when 45 Alan came back to inspect our SWMS, he withdrew that. 46 I installed on the 21st water filled barriers which 47 actually cut down my buffer zone by about a metre and a

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 719 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 half, so when Alan came back to inspect the other stuff, he 2 agreed with me that that wasn't a good solution and that my 3 original safety measures was sufficient. 4 5 Q. Was there a further notice given about that? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. The next item says, "Storage of timber and steel on 9 formwork frames". Do you know what that's a reference to? 10 A. Yes, that's a reference to A-frames which sometimes we 11 put a few bits and pieces of timber on to get them off the 12 deck. In fact, they were placed there incorrectly, not 13 according to the design of the A-frame, so we quickly 14 removed them. 15 16 Q. Was that something the CFMEU raised? 17 A. No. 18 19 Q. The next item is "Review access and regress to site 20 office". Do you know what that refers to? 21 A. I don't really. Me and Alan Chipperfield didn't 22 really talk about that, no. 23 24 Q. You were involved in the Easty Street Project? 25 A. Correct. 26 27 Q. Were you present on-site when Mr Luke Poskus visited? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. Did Mr Poskus raise safety issues at the time of that 31 visit? 32 A. Yes, he tried to point out some safety issues, yes. 33 34 Q. What did he say they were? 35 A. One was, to my best recollection, a power box had some 36 holes in the back panel. He quoted some legislation which 37 in fact was wrong and then he went on to - we walked around 38 the site and he looked at some kickboards that weren't 39 installed on a temporary handrail around a stair. To my 40 best recollection, there was a couple of other bits and 41 pieces but then nothing really came out of it. 42 43 Q. Did Mr Poskus give you a Rectification Notice about 44 it? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. Do you know if he gave anyone else a

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 720 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Rectification Notice? 2 A. Not to my knowledge. 3 4 Q. So you have never seen a Rectification Notice? 5 A. No. No. 6 7 Q. Was any rectification work actually done during or 8 following his visit? 9 A. Yes. The power box, I got the electricians to plug 10 the sort of pen-sized holes in the back because I agreed 11 with that safety issue. 12 13 MR SCRUBY: Thank you. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 16 17 MR AGIUS: I won't finish in six minutes but I'm happy to 18 start. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Let's start and see how we get on. 21 22

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 721 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Correct, hence, only the one Improvement Notice. 2 3 Q. But you don't mean by that that whilst they were on 4 the site they didn't raise any other concerns, do you? 5 A. No, on their site visit they had to document the 6 Union's concerns, as the workplace visit states. 7 8 Q. They raised other concerns with you which are recorded 9 in the workplace visit document, did they not? 10 A. Yes, but if you have a look it says, "Nil issues. 11 Nothing further arising". 12 13 Q. Yes, "Nothing further arising" in relation to the last 14 entry on the page; is that right? 15 A. What's right is I didn't have to improve anything. 16 17 Q. What you had to do was ensure that workers who were 18 going to be working on the pour had been inducted correctly 19 into the SafeWork method statement applicable to that pour, 20 did you not? 21 A. Correct. 22 23 Q. That was something that was discussed with you by the 24 WorkSafe officers? 25 A. Correct, which we did. 26 27 Q. And that is something that you were asked to do, was 28 it not? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. And you know, don't you, that it is a significant 32 safety issue to have workers who had not been inducted 33 correctly into a SafeWork method; you know that, don't you? 34 A. Their same SafeWork method statement that they get 35 inducted to on every site, yes. 36 37 Q. How do you know that? How do you know that the two 38 workers who had not been inducted correctly had previously 39 been inducted? 40 A. Because if they had been in the industry for longer 41 than a week then they would have been. 42 43 Q. But that's not a site-specific induction, is it? 44 A. I was happy with the safety improvement notice and 45 I agreed with it. 46 47 Q. Yes. Let's get back to what I'm asking you about. It

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 722 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 is a significant safety issue if workers who are about to 2 be working on a pour of concrete have not been properly 3 inducted into the SWMS which applies to that pour, 4 isn't it? 5 A. I don't disagree with that. 6 7 Q. The Gungahlin Concrete Pumping Work Health and Safety 8 Plan was incomplete? 9 A. There was a date on it incorrectly, yes. 10 11 Q. Are you saying that's all it was? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. Where is that plan? 15 A. In our site safety office. 16 17 Q. Have you been asked to produce it to the 18 Royal Commission? 19 A. No. 20 21 Q. What was the date? 22 A. 2013. 23 24 Q. Are you saying that was the only error? And please 25 understand that the WorkSafe officers can be called before 26 this Commission to give evidence. 27 A. Yes, I do understand it, I've investigated it 28 extensively, and there was the table of contents which had 29 documents in it that was not in that site-specific safety 30 plan which wasn't applicable to our site. 31 32 Q. So it wasn't just the matter of date? 33 A. No. The table of contents said that things were in it 34 that weren't, but they weren't applicable to our site. 35 36 Q. You know you're on your oath, don't you? 37 A. Yes, I do. 38 39 Q. You said it took that day and the next day for 40 Gungahlin to complete their work health and safety plan? 41 A. To get it up to our standard, yes. 42 43 Q. Yes. It was incomplete to your standard? 44 A. Correct. 45 46 Q. Therefore, it was not safe? 47 A. I disagree to that.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 723 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. If it was not relevant to safety, why would work 3 health and safety officers have required that the pumping 4 work health and safety plan be made complete? 5 A. I don't know. 6 7 Q. One of the first things you were told by the Union 8 officers when they arrived on-site was that there was 9 insufficient protection for the scaffolding at the entrance 10 to the site? 11 A. The first thing they mentioned was the no fall 12 protection on the stairs. 13 14 Q. I said "one of the first things". You don't want to 15 turn this into a combat, do you? 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Really, Mr Agius, that is not called 18 for. The man may be making mistakes -- 19 20 MR AGIUS: Commissioner, he's not answering my question. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius, let me just finish my 23 sentence and then perhaps you can make an observation, if 24 you wish. He may be making mistakes, in your opinion. 25 He is trying to answer in a perfectly reasonable way. It 26 doesn't assist to get testy with him. 27 28 MR AGIUS: Q. One of the first things that the CFMEU 29 officers spoke to you about was the absence of sufficient 30 protection for the scaffolding at the entry to the site; 31 isn't that right? 32 A. Correct, yes. 33 34 Q. That was the same entry that was being used by the 35 reversing concrete trucks; isn't that right? 36 A. The pump was actually another barrier for the agis: 37 no, that's incorrect. 38 39 Q. I'm not talking about where the pump was, I'm talking 40 about the vehicle entry point. 41 A. The vehicle entry point - the back of the pump was at 42 the back of the scaffolding, so the agis, it was 43 impossible, unless they drove over the pump and over the 44 concrete slab I had, to hit the scaffolding, so that is 45 incorrect. 46 47 Q. These trucks had to reverse into place, didn't they?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 724 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. To the back of the pump, yes. 2 3 Q. They had to reverse from a car park or an area which 4 was outside the site; is that right? 5 A. Correct, yes. 6 7 Q. They had to reverse over a road which was being used 8 that day by commuters and drivers? 9 A. Yes. Yes. 10 11 Q. Isn't that right? 12 A. Correct, yes. 13 14 Q. And they then had to reverse on to the site? 15 A. Correct. 16 17 Q. At that point there was insufficient protection of the 18 scaffolding, was there not? 19 A. In my opinion, no. 20 21 Q. But you did add to the protection at that point, did 22 you not? 23 A. Yes, but then we removed it. 24 25 Q. Yes, but you added to it because you were asked to by 26 WorkSafe? 27 A. Not in that area, no. I added to it because our 28 manager, our management said, "Just put water barriers 29 right the way along there", so when WorkSafe inspected it 30 he only required four barriers either end where the slab 31 wasn't, so I misunderstood the WorkSafe's instruction. 32 33 Q. What he required was barriers at the vehicle entry 34 point? 35 A. Which I installed on the 21st. 36 37 MR AGIUS: Is that a convenient time? 38 39 THE COMMISSIONER: One day this week we began lunch at 40 1.45. 41 42 MR AGIUS: I am happy to keep going. I am thinking of the 43 whole of the Commission and it's not my place to do so, 44 but -- 45 46 THE COMMISSIONER: No. I will tell you what I'm thinking 47 of. I have a sort of Renaissance mentality; there are so

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 725 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 many ideas tumbling through my head. I am really worried - 2 and it is not your fault at all, Mr Agius, I am not saying 3 it's anyone's fault - about a lot of people waiting 4 outside, so I think if you were able to carry on with 5 Mr Beaumont, it would be a good idea and I invite you to. 6 7 MR DOCKING: Commissioner, can I indicate a new matter has 8 arisen that I was given no notice about and I am going to 9 need the adjournment to get instructions. No notice was 10 given about Mr Poskus who was mentioned in this witness's 11 evidence. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Let's at least see if Mr Agius's 14 questions can be finished and then we can have lunch and 15 then you can get the instructions and you can ask 16 questions, if necessary, after lunch. 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Incidentally, Mr Beaumont, you're 19 perfectly happy to soldier on, are you? 20 A. Oh, yes. 21 22 Q. And postpone lunch for a while? That's good for you? 23 A. Yes, no problem. 24 25 MR AGIUS: Q. The Union officers arrived on the site at 26 about 7.15 or 7.20? 27 A. Yes, roughly, to my best recollection. 28 29 Q. And at 7.32, you are calling the police to come and 30 have them removed from the site? 31 A. It escalated fast, yes. 32 33 Q. What did you understand were the criteria that applied 34 to their right of entry in relation to a safety issue at 35 that time? 36 A. Sorry, can you repeat that? 37 38 Q. What did you understand that the Union had to believe 39 or know before they could enter your site for a safety 40 issue at that time? 41 A. They just had to have reasonable information that 42 there was a safety concern on the site. 43 44 Q. A reasonable belief that there was a safety concern on 45 the site? 46 A. Yes, whether a - yes. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 726 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. And within 15 minutes, at the most, of their arrival 2 you were on the phone wanting them removed? 3 A. Yes, within 15 minutes I'd formed the opinion that 4 they were just trying to be bullies to shut us down. 5 6 Q. You were just not interested in the safety issues 7 within those 15 minutes, were you? 8 A. I was very interested in the safety issues and, 9 you know, I take offence to say that I'm not interested in 10 safety issues. 11 12 Q. Why did you want them thrown off the site before you'd 13 been able to attend to any one of those safety issues? 14 A. I believe I attended to each one of those safety 15 issues. 16 17 Q. In the 15 minutes? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. That's complete rubbish, isn't it? 21 A. I answered each safety concern with what I believed as 22 them not being an issue. 23 24 Q. How long did it take you to put the concrete barriers 25 in place to protect the scaffold? 26 A. It took that afternoon; after the pump went 27 I installed the water filled barriers. 28 29 Q. Within 15 or 20 minutes of the arrival of the Union on 30 the site, you had done nothing to address that issue? 31 A. I believe that I had sufficient delineation between 32 the pump and the scaffold. 33 34 Q. What about the answer to my question? You had done 35 nothing about improving the delineation with respect to the 36 scaffolding? 37 A. Correct, because I didn't believe I had to do 38 anything. 39 40 Q. And yet, that was the same issue that WorkSafe asked 41 you to attend to when they arrived on-site? 42 A. Yes, but I misunderstood where they wanted to place 43 the barriers. It wasn't in fact where the CFMEU wanted to 44 place the barriers. 45 46 Q. Yes. I suggest to you that that's just rubbish. 47 I think you're making that up.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 727 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I'm not. 2 3 Q. I put it to you that you're making it up? 4 A. I'm not. 5 6 Q. What you're trying to do is to defend your 7 unreasonable action in, contrary to the law, having these 8 people removed from the site after they had brought safety 9 questions to your attention? 10 11 MR CHIN: I object to the question and the reference to 12 "contrary to the law" in particular. 13 14 MR AGIUS: I will spend some more time opening that up. 15 16 Q. You knew, didn't you, that WorkSafe inspectors -- 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius - no, Mr Agius. 19 20 MR AGIUS: I am trying to save some time. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right. 23 24 MR AGIUS: My learned friends on my left try to do this 25 all the time. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Pardon? 28 29 MR AGIUS: They collapse evidence to get to the point: 30 that's what I'm trying to do. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Just calm down, Mr Agius. What 33 question do you want to ask? 34 35 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 36 37 Q. You prevented the Union officers from making copies of 38 documents on-site, didn't you? 39 A. Me personally? No. 40 41 Q. Well, you directed that, didn't you? 42 A. No. 43 44 Q. You knew it happened? 45 A. I saw Union officials in our private office going 46 through personal documents trying to photocopy things, yes, 47 that's what I witnessed.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 728 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Were you aware that the Union officers were attempting 3 to photocopy documents? 4 A. I was aware of a few other things, but I wasn't aware 5 that they were trying to legitimately photocopy documents, 6 no. 7 8 Q. What about the answer to my question? Were you aware 9 that they were trying to copy documents whilst they were 10 on-site? 11 A. I was aware of that, definitely, yes, but my office 12 doesn't have any induction documents in there. My office 13 has contracts and things of that sensitive nature. 14 15 Q. Did you see the documents in the hands of the Union 16 officials that they were attempting to copy? 17 A. I saw paperwork in their hand, yes. 18 19 Q. Did you identify what the paperwork was? 20 A. No. 21 22 Q. Did you see that they were being prevented from 23 copying the material? 24 A. No, no, I didn't see that. 25 26 Q. Did you see that they were being permitted -- 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius, what provision of legislation 29 gives an official a right personally to copy, as distinct 30 from requiring the person conducting the business to allow 31 inspection and then to make copies of the document? In 32 other words - this is an open question - does the official 33 have a right, as it were, to search and then copy whatever 34 the official wants to copy, or is the official's right to 35 require the person conducting the business to permit the 36 official to inspect? 37 38 MR AGIUS: The way we read it is that the Union official 39 who is properly permitted, that is, who has an appropriate 40 permit and who has the necessary reasonable suspicion, is 41 permitted to require the person conducting the business to 42 allow the permit holder to make the copies. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, very well. 45 46 MR AGIUS: Q. Were you aware that the Union officials 47 were being denied access to copying?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 729 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. No. 2 3 Q. What did you do when you saw the Union officials with 4 documents in their hands attempting to copy them? 5 A. I thought, "What are they doing in our private 6 office?" 7 8 Q. What did you do, not what you thought? 9 A. Nothing, I didn't do anything. 10 11 Q. Was there anybody else there with them whilst they 12 were attempting to make these copies? 13 A. Yes, Tony Davey and Colin Burson were in and around 14 the site office. 15 16 Q. Did you hear anybody else deny them use of the 17 photocopying machine? 18 A. No, I didn't, no. 19 20 Q. So you were aware that Union officers had filed 21 statements in which they say they were denied access to the 22 photocopying machine? 23 A. Yes, I'm aware of that. 24 25 Q. You say that's not true, do you? 26 A. No, I say I did not witness any of Milin's staff 27 stopping Union officials from photocopying documents. 28 29 Q. Did you know that the helicopters were on the scaffold 30 before attention was drawn to them by Mr Vitler of the 31 Union? 32 A. Yes, I placed them there on that morning. 33 34 Q. And then you removed them upon the request of the 35 Union? 36 A. Correct. 37 38 Q. What conversation do you say you had with the Union 39 officers about the work that was being done on the 40 formwork? 41 A. They said, "You're doing structural work on the 42 formwork." And I think I laughed in some way and thought - 43 I said, "That's bullshit, it's not structural work. The 44 hob timbers have just come down from the concreters walking 45 on it. They're putting two nails in it", something along 46 those lines. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 730 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. What was their response? 2 A. Their response to all of my answers to their safety 3 concerns was nothing really and by silence I assumed that 4 they didn't disagree. 5 6 Q. Did you examine what was actually happening on the 7 road and what kind of traffic management was being applied 8 by the two officers who were out there? 9 A. Yes, at different points I did. Yes, at different 10 points I did. I was able to walk over and just see what 11 was going on outside, yes. 12 13 Q. Did you see these traffic managers looking the wrong 14 way? 15 A. You've got to look both ways when you're controlling 16 traffic, so it's very easy to take a photo when someone's 17 looking like that or looking like that. (Indicating). 18 Yes, I think - with the circumstances, I think they were 19 doing a good job. 20 21 Q. Were you party to any conversations that the Union 22 officials had with any one of them? Were you able to hear 23 those conversations? 24 A. No, no, I could just see them approaching them, 25 filming them, talking to them and I viewed that in a 26 high-risk situation as disruptive. 27 28 Q. Did you know that they were offering to assist them? 29 A. No, I didn't, of course I didn't. 30 31 Q. Did you know that at least one of the Union officials 32 did assist in traffic management? 33 A. No, I wasn't aware of that. 34 35 Q. Is that the reason why you had another traffic manager 36 brought down to the scene? 37 A. No. The reason why I had another traffic manager 38 brought down to the scene was because there were two 39 paddy wagons, three Union officials and obviously traffic 40 and pedestrians and people around; it was a busy corner on 41 that day. 42 43 Q. I suggest to you that your traffic control outside 44 that site was unsafe and inadequate? 45 A. I disagree. 46 47 Q. Do you deny that there was no spotter to assist the

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 731 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 drivers of the concrete agitators to reverse back into the 2 site? 3 A. Well, normally the other agi or the pump operator will 4 assist with the backing on. 5 6 Q. Leaving aside what normally happens, do you deny that 7 on that day at that morning when the Union officials were 8 there, there was no spotter to assist the agitator driver 9 to reverse into the site? 10 A. Yes, I deny that because it's common practice to back 11 them up. 12 13 Q. You're relying upon what you expected would be the 14 common practice? 15 A. Yes, and I mean, I witnessed the agi drivers backing 16 him up and the pump operator hitting the button when he had 17 to stop and also my traffic controllers are responsible in 18 some way for, you know, backing them off the road. 19 20 Q. How can they assist in backing the truck if they're 21 meant to be controlling traffic on the road? 22 A. They're assisting them off the road, not backing on to 23 the pump; that's the pump operator or the secondary agi 24 driver's job. 25 26 Q. I suggest to you that there was no spotter assisting 27 the agi drivers to back their trucks off the road and on to 28 the site? 29 A. Quite possibly, but I don't see where it says you have 30 to have a spotter to back a truck on to a pump. 31 32 Q. You said earlier in your evidence that you viewed the 33 Union officers who came on to the site as trespassers? 34 A. I did, yes. 35 36 Q. You did that from the minute that they came on the 37 site, didn't you? 38 A. Oh, about 15 minutes after. 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: That is not his evidence. 41 42 MR AGIUS: Yes, I know. He has agreed that he viewed them 43 as trespassers. What I'm putting to him is that he had 44 that view from the minute they came on the site. 45 46 THE COMMISSIONER: That was your last question, not your 47 second-last question. Mr Agius, let's approach it this

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 732 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 way. 2 3 Q. Mr Beaumont, earlier you said you viewed the officials 4 as trespassers. You were speaking of a relatively late 5 time in these events, right? Correct? 6 A. Well after the time that they came on-site, yes. 7 8 Q. When they came on the site at approximately 7.20, did 9 you view them as trespassers then or as bona-fide entrants? 10 A. No. No. 11 12 MR AGIUS: Q. At what point did you view them as 13 trespassers? 14 A. When they persisted to disrupt. 15 16 Q. How much time after they arrived? 17 A. 15, 20 minutes. 18 19 Q. Within the first 15 or 20 minutes you had formed the 20 view that they were trespassing and didn't have a right to 21 be there? 22 A. Correct. 23 24 Q. Even though they had identified a significant safety 25 issue in relation to the absence of appropriate delineation 26 between plant and scaffold? 27 A. In my opinion at the time I disagreed. 28 29 Q. But you changed that view later? 30 A. No. 31 32 Q. You've added more protection? 33 A. Yes, under our management's advice, which later on 34 WorkSafe agreed that I could remove those barriers. 35 36 Q. We have nothing from WorkSafe to that effect. Do you 37 have anything from WorkSafe to that effect? 38 A. No, but I don't have an Improvement Notice for it 39 either. 40 41 Q. No, but you do have a note, don't you, from WorkSafe? 42 A. A site-visit note, yes. 43 44 Q. That delineation between plant and scaffold was 45 insufficient at the vehicle entry point? 46 A. Yes. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 733 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. And that concrete barriers are being placed by 2 Milin Builders? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. And so you had directed concrete barriers to be placed 6 there because WorkSafe had pointed out that the delineation 7 between plant and scaffold was insufficient? 8 A. No, that's incorrect. In fact, I saw that site-visit 9 note only in the last week, that workplace visit, so at the 10 time I installed the water filled barriers because our 11 management instructed me to. 12 13 Q. This workplace visit note was, you would expect, made 14 on the same day as the visit, would you not? 15 A. Correct. It was sent to my project manager, 16 Tony Davey, and unfortunately there was a breakdown in 17 communication and I have only seen it recently. 18 19 Q. You have no note as to why it was that you put the 20 concrete barriers in place? 21 A. I have no note? 22 23 Q. Or that you put barriers in place, you have no note 24 about that at all? 25 A. No note? 26 27 Q. Yes. Are you agreeing with me, you have no note about 28 it? 29 A. What do you mean I have no note? 30 31 Q. What part of the words "you have no note" do you not 32 understand? 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: He wants to know where the note came 35 from, I think. Is the question, "You had no note from 36 WorkSafe?" 37 38 THE WITNESS: What happened was -- 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: Just a moment. 41 42 MR AGIUS: I will withdraw it and put it another way. 43 44 Q. You have no record of why it was and the circumstances 45 in which you came to direct barriers be put in place to 46 protect the scaffold, do you? 47 A. I put the barriers there because I knew the CFMEU had

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 734 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 an issue with it and my management instructed me to put 2 them there. 3 4 Q. But had you not been in discussions with WorkSafe? 5 Did you not learn from them that their view was that the 6 delineation between plant and scaffold was insufficient at 7 the entry point? 8 A. On the 21st, no, no, I didn't have a conversation with 9 any WorkSafe officer about the need for concrete barriers. 10 I've only recently realised that they sent a note that 11 referred to them. 12 13 Q. Do you know who it was that interacted with the 14 WorkSafe officers that were on-site? 15 A. Myself. 16 17 Q. Only you? 18 A. No, myself, Tony Davey, Colin Burson, 19 Zvonimir Seselja, all of us. 20 21 Q. And through all of that you never learnt that it was 22 WorkSafe's view that there was insufficient delineation 23 between plant and scaffold on that day? 24 A. Correct. 25 26 Q. At paragraph 35 of your statement, you say that you 27 are aware of the rule that only two Union representatives 28 should be on-site at one time. 29 A. Yes, I say that in my statement. 30 31 Q. And you say: 32 33 I believe that to be a rule in the 34 Fair Work Act. 35 36 A. At the time I wrote the statement, yes, I believed 37 that. 38 39 Q. Is that what you also believed on this day, 21 April? 40 A. That's what I believed on that day, yes. 41 42 Q. Do you still hold that belief? 43 A. No. 44 45 Q. Did you understand at the time you made this statement 46 that the CFMEU were not attempting to either enter the site 47 or remain on the site pursuant to the Fair Work Act?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 735 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Sorry, can you repeat that? 2 3 Q. Did you understand, at the time you made your 4 statement, that the CFMEU were not, in effect, saying that 5 their right of entry was permitted by the Fair Work Act? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. Did you understand that they were exercising what they 9 said was a right under section 117 of the Work Health and 10 Safety Act? 11 A. Oh, yes, yes. 12 13 Q. So you -- 14 A. I agree with their right to go on to building sites if 15 there's been safety concerns. I agree with the 16 legislation. 17 18 Q. Why do you say then at paragraph 25: 19 20 On viewing the Notice 0057, I had formed 21 the view that the CFMEU did not have a 22 proper right to remain under the Fair Work 23 Act and related legislation as I thought 24 they were making up things to try to 25 disrupt or stop the concrete pour ... 26 27 A. That's why I didn't believe they still had the right. 28 I was performing a high-risk activity and I didn't see it 29 as safe what they were doing. 30 31 Q. Let me just read that again. You begin by saying: 32 33 On viewing the Notice 0057, I had formed 34 the view ... 35 36 Does that mean that upon viewing the notice, you had formed 37 the view that the CFMEU did not have a right to be on-site? 38 A. That means at the time I believed that the CFMEU 39 didn't have the right to be on-site. 40 41 Q. From the point when you viewed the notice? 42 A. No, from the point where I believed that everything I 43 was doing was safe. 44 45 Q. But your statement says "On viewing the Notice"? 46 A. Yes, because the items on the notice I saw as bogus 47 and safe.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 736 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Does that mean that you formed the view when you first 3 saw the notice? 4 A. No, I formed the view a little bit before that. 5 6 Q. You formed the view even before you saw the notice? 7 A. And when I saw the notice, at a similar time, yes. 8 9 MR AGIUS: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, Mr Agius. Mr Morison 12 has no questions, I presume? 13 14 MR MORISON: No, Commissioner. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin may have some later. 17 18 MR CHIN: Yes. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: I think what we will do is adjourn 21 until 2.25pm so that we can feed the inner man and so that 22 Mr Docking can get instructions on the matter he mentioned 23 earlier. Could you be back before 2.25, Mr Beaumont? 24 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 26 27 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Docking? 30 31 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 32 33

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 737 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Yes. The power box, I got the electricians 2 to plug the sort of pen-sized holes in the 3 back because I agreed with that safety 4 issue. 5 6 Do you recall giving that evidence? 7 A. Pen-sized, yes, that's correct. 8 9 Q. If work was undertaken, which you agreed with 10 Counsel Assisting was rectification work, a record would 11 have been kept on site? 12 A. Of me rectifying a hole in the back of a power box, 13 no. 14 15 Q. Are you saying if a legitimate safety issue was 16 identified on site, no record would be kept? 17 A. Yes. Of putting a bit of a silicon in that pen-sized 18 hole, in the back of a safety board, no, I don't keep a 19 record of that. 20 21 Q. Do you know if any request has been made by the 22 Royal Commission concerning any record that Mr Poskus might 23 have caused to be made from his visits being issued to your 24 company? 25 A. Sorry, can you repeat that? 26 27 Q. Has your company been asked to produce any record 28 about Mr Poskus's visit? 29 A. Yes, but it doesn't exist. 30 31 Q. What doesn't exist? 32 A. Any documents relating to his visit. 33 34 Q. And given you agreed with the need for the 35 rectification work, can you please tell the Commission 36 which Australian Standard required that work to be 37 completed? 38 A. No, I can't, but a gentleman that - my safety officer 39 at the time could. 40 41 Q. Are you familiar with AS NZS 3012:2010 "Electrical 42 installations - construction demolition sites" which was 43 called up as a mandatory Standard by clause 163 of the Work 44 Health and Safety Regulations 2011? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. Is that not the reason why the holes had to be

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 738 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 covered? 2 A. Probably, yes. 3 4 Q. You're just reluctant to agree that it was a 5 legitimate safety issue, aren't you? 6 A. No, I -- 7 8 MR SCRUBY: I object. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: I do not think that is really called 11 for, Mr Docking. 12 13 MR DOCKING: Commissioner, I appreciate 14 Counsel Assisting's assistance. I can hand the witness a 15 clean copy of Mr Poskus's statement with two yellow Post-It 16 notes on it to help identify some attachments to that 17 statement. It is to save the witness leafing through 18 finding them. 19 20 Q. For the record, these are part of the annexures 21 comprising LP-2. I am going to, within that annexure, a 22 WorkCover Facts Sheet, "Electrical practices - Construction 23 and Demolition Sites". Do you have that in front of you? 24 You can see what I am referring to, the first yellow 25 Post-It note. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Docking, if you really want to 28 question along these lines, you will have to go more 29 slowly. 30 31 THE WITNESS: Yes, I can. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Just a moment, Mr Beaumont. LP-2 34 we are looking for? 35 36 MR DOCKING: Yes, Commissioner. It is a New South Wales 37 WorkCover Facts Sheet, "Electrical practices - Construction 38 and Demolition Sites". 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: I have that, yes. 41 42 Q. Have you got that, Mr Beaumont? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 MR DOCKING: Q. Do you see about a quarter of the way 46 down it sets out the proposition I put to you before, that 47 this is an Australian Standard picked up by clause 163 of

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 739 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011? Do you see 2 what I'm referring to? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. If you then go to the next page, there is a subheading 6 about one-third of the way down, 7 "Switchboard construction". Do you see the third dot point 8 is: 9 10 Energised (live) parts must be effectively 11 protected at all times against contact by 12 workers. 13 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. That is the reason why the rectification work had to 17 be undertaken, wasn't it? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. Mr Poskus, it seems, entirely understood what was the 21 applicable Australian Standard and Regulation which bound 22 your company to fix up that work? 23 A. Yes, that's correct, but the clauses he referred us to 24 were actually incorrect. With further investigation, we 25 discovered that. 26 27 Q. You didn't say what clauses they were when 28 Counsel Assisting asked you in the witness box now. What 29 clauses do you claim he referred you to? 30 A. I can't remember what clause he referred me to two 31 years ago. 32 33 Q. Whilst it will be a matter for the Commission, if it 34 has to trouble itself, but having seen, in the witness box, 35 this summary of the relevant Australian Standard, do you 36 accept that is why the rectification work had to be done? 37 A. I accepted that previously, that I agreed with the 38 rectification work, and it was done immediately. 39 40 Q. I then want to just go back to your oral evidence 41 before the adjournment. The record at page 720, about 42 line 39, you said: 43 44 There was a couple of other bits and pieces 45 but then nothing really came out of it. 46 47 Do you recall giving that evidence?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 740 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. In the witness box today, is it the case that you 4 cannot recall what those other bits and pieces were? 5 A. I can recall a couple of them, but not as many as his 6 statement says. 7 8 Q. Yes, thank you. I was going to clarify that. You 9 have read his statement before you got in the witness box? 10 A. I briefly skimmed over it prior to now, yes. 11 12 Q. Going upon your recollection as opposed to what is in 13 his statement, what are the other bits and pieces that you 14 could recall without looking at his statement? 15 A. One of them, from my best recollection, was no 16 kickboard on some temporary handrail around a stair. So, 17 we did a risk assessment on that particular stair prior to 18 him coming on site, and we believed we correctly had it 19 safe. 20 21 Q. Are you saying no change was made? 22 A. Correct. No change was made. 23 24 Q. But you accept that a CEPU official had a valid right 25 to attend and raise that as a suspicion? 26 A. Oh, of course. 27 28 Q. And the company never put that in issue, that he had a 29 right to come on site, raise that as a suspicion and see 30 what the company thought? 31 A. No, we were happy to work with WorkSafe and the CFMEU 32 in any safety concerns that they have. 33 34 Q. I am not sure if you understand. I'm appearing for 35 the Plumbers Division of the CEPU. So the same answer 36 would apply to that Union? 37 A. Yes, anyone that's concerned about safety. 38 39 Q. And what else can you recall were the "bits and 40 pieces" this CEPU official raised? 41 A. To my best recollection, nothing else. 42 43 Q. Might you, with the passage of time, not be able to 44 recall accurately all the matters he raised? 45 A. Oh, definitely, yes. 46 47 Q. I want you to assume somebody called Mr Hook - do you

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 741 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 know him? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. He said no issues were found. Based on your own 5 evidence, that is incorrect, isn't it? 6 A. Yeah, well, his recollection is obviously different to 7 mine. 8 9 Q. Did you know that's what he said? 10 A. No, I haven't read Mr Hook's statement. 11 12 Q. Insofar as Mr Poskus's statement is concerned, is it 13 the case you can't confirm or deny the other concerns that 14 he said he suspected and -- 15 A. Yes, I can't confirm or deny. All I can say is we 16 didn't see any documents to say that there was any issues. 17 That's what I can confirm. 18 19 Q. Is this the position: at the time of that 20 construction site, there was a written instruction visible 21 to any person who wanted to attend, directing them to 22 attend the site office? 23 A. Yes, correct. 24 25 Q. In your experience, that's the standard provision for 26 construction sites for years? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. So persons can attend, follow that written direction, 30 attend the site office and get permission to be on site? 31 A. Yes, of course. 32 33 Q. And that's still the case today, in your experience? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. And that includes CEPU officials, plumbers or 37 electricians? 38 A. Anyone off the street, yes, anyone. 39 40 Q. On this occasion, it is the case, is it not, that you 41 were not present when Mr Poskus followed such a direction, 42 went to the site office, and spoke to Mr Hook? 43 A. Yes, I wasn't present then, no. 44 45 Q. So you don't know what, if anything, Mr Poskus handed 46 to Mr Hook by way of a written document? 47 A. After - I was there when he was leaving, but I wasn't

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 742 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 there when he came, so I can't see how he'd hand a document 2 to Dick Hook prior to going on the safety walk, but I was 3 there when he left, and there was no documentation given. 4 5 Q. You're only talking about when he left? 6 A. Correct, yes. 7 8 Q. Look, I think some terminology is a bit confused. 9 I appreciate you said there was no rectification notice? 10 A. Yes. To my knowledge there wasn't, no. 11 12 Q. And to your knowledge, a Union official under the 13 harmonised Work Health and Safety Act 2011 - Act or 14 Regulations - cannot issue a rectification notice? 15 A. I'm aware of that, yes. 16 17 Q. What they can do is give a notice about suspected 18 contraventions? 19 A. That's correct, yes. 20 21 Q. Can I show the witness this document. 22 23 MR DOCKING: I have a copy for the Commissioner, 24 Counsel Assisting and the witness. Sorry, I have only 25 three spare copies at the moment. 26 27 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 28 29 MR DOCKING: Q. I accept there is some mistaken 30 terminology about rectification notice, but have you ever 31 seen this type of Health and Safety Notice issued by the 32 CEPU before? 33 A. No. 34 35 Q. Are you aware that they have a standard form to advise 36 the controller of the premises of when an official 37 reasonably suspects there's a contravention? 38 A. No. I'd assume they would, but, no, I'm not aware of 39 the fact that the CEPU has a specific form. 40 41 Q. Is that something Mr Hook would deal with? 42 A. Oh, generally, and obviously co-ordinate with myself. 43 44 Q. What was your position at the time? 45 A. I was the site manager on the site. 46 47 Q. You don't dispute Mr Poskus's evidence that the visit

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 743 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 was on 3 July 2013? 2 A. I don't dispute that because I didn't make a record of 3 the site visit. 4 5 Q. The component that's going to your evidence about the 6 kickboard of a system to prevent falls, can you describe 7 what they are, starting from -- 8 A. It is not a system to prevent falls. It is a system 9 to prevent debris going off an edge on to a worker below. 10 11 Q. I accept that correction. Don't they have multiple 12 purposes to stop objects falling and injuring people below, 13 that's one purpose? 14 A. That's the purpose for them, yes. 15 16 Q. If they're above a certain height, do they not also 17 have a purpose of trying to minimise someone falling? 18 A. No. No, that's what the handrails are there for. 19 20 Q. Yes, but the entire system, starting from the deck up, 21 includes handrails - sorry, starting from the top, a 22 mid-rail and kickboards or toe-boards? 23 A. It doesn't always have to be a toe-board, no. 24 25 Q. That's often the standard way? 26 A. Some people do it like that, yes. 27 28 Q. Can you actually, from your own recollection, today, 29 remember what the state of the handrails were on 3 July 30 2013 at this site? 31 A. What the state of the particular handrail involved? 32 Yes, it was an approved handrail fixed down with four bolts 33 to the ply and a slide - two 50mm slide pipes in between. 34 35 Q. The standard system is there is supposed to be an 36 engineer's test report attached? 37 A. Yes. Correct, yes. 38 39 Q. I suggest to you on this occasion that the system of 40 the handrails was not compliant with that engineer's test 41 report? 42 A. Incorrect. 43 44 Q. Do you know what falsework is? 45 A. Falsework? 46 47 Q. Yes.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 744 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. No. 2 3 Q. Do you know it can be a temporary structure that 4 supports, for example, formwork, the formwork being what 5 you might have the concrete poured into? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. Does that now ring a bell? 9 A. Falsework, yes. We don't call it "falsework", but 10 yes. 11 12 Q. Putting aside the label, do you accept - that's a 13 description I'm using - Mr Poskus did inspect an area where 14 there was such falsework on that day? 15 A. Okay, yes. 16 17 Q. Do you accept that? 18 A. We walked up and down the falsework. 19 20 Q. He also identified problems with egress and ingress 21 being unsafe, didn't he? 22 A. Not to my recollection, no. 23 24 Q. Is this an area you accept, with the passage of time, 25 you might be -- 26 A. Oh, it's possible, but to my best recollection, 27 I can't recall him having a problem with access/egress. 28 29 Q. Well, I'll raise this with you, that he raised there 30 was a path that was poorly lit as an access way, and 31 tradesmen or construction workers were carrying items in 32 that area; do you recall that? 33 A. No. 34 35 Q. You don't deny it? 36 A. To my best recollection, I don't recall him saying 37 anything about unlit walkways. Particularly it was in the 38 middle of the day, so I don't know how it would have been 39 unlit. 40 41 Q. On constructions sites, are not parts enclosed when 42 you're building residential -- 43 A. We were on level 1, which is only one level above the 44 basement. 45 46 Q. Do you remember anything about there was no proper 47 delineation and separation between the formwork and the

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 745 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 access or walkway? 2 A. Between the formwork and access or walkway? 3 4 Q. Do you remember anything about that, or you can't 5 comment? 6 A. No. No. 7 8 Q. You can't comment? 9 A. I mean, I don't remember him saying anything about 10 access delineation between the walkway and the formwork. 11 The formwork often is the walkway. 12 13 Q. Do you remember him saying something about that he 14 suspected - he had reported to him that people were walking 15 in front of moving plant? 16 A. No, I don't recall that. 17 18 Q. You don't deny he raised that, do you? 19 A. I don't deny it because I don't recall it. 20 21 MR DOCKING: Commissioner, I'm in the Commission's hands. 22 I can indicate when Mr Poskus gives evidence, he will 23 confirm that the sheet I have shown the witness is the 24 pro forma used at the time. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: So that we all know where we are, 27 I suppose it should be marked as an exhibit now. Do you 28 wish that to happen? 29 30 MR DOCKING: Yes, Commissioner. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: You tender it, Mr Scruby? 33 34 MR SCRUBY: Yes. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: That will be Beaumont MFI-3. 37 38 BEAUMONT MFI-3 HEALTH AND SAFETY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE CEPU 39 40 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Docking. Mr Chin? 43 44 MR CHIN: Thank you, Commissioner. 45 46

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 746 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 MR CHIN: Q. On the Easty Street site issue, you are 2 aware Mr Poskus in his statement suggests that after giving 3 a written rectification notice, as he calls it, the project 4 manager removed workers from below until the handrail had 5 been properly installed. What do you say as to that? 6 A. I don't recall any workers stopping or any 7 rectification work, other than the power box getting done. 8 9 Q. Did he also suggest that the project manager - who was 10 the project manager by the way? 11 A. Tony Davey. 12 13 Q. And you were the site manager? 14 A. Correct. 15 16 Q. He suggests that the project manager stopped people 17 using the access that he had a concern with until it had 18 been safely lit; what do you say to that? 19 A. I don't have any recollection of that. 20 21 Q. Can I turn now just briefly to the issue of the 22 Moore Street site visitation on 21 April, about which you 23 were asked questions by Counsel Assisting and Mr Agius for 24 the CFMEU. You were asked about WorkSafe's response to 25 some of the Union's safety concerns expressed on that day. 26 Do you recall those questions? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. I want to ask you some questions about WorkSafe's 30 response in relation to those matters. I have a list of 31 those matters, if I can go through about seven or eight. 32 The first is you were aware, Mr Beaumont, that one of the 33 concerns raised by the Union was the issue of whether 34 Mr Seselja, Zvon Seselja, had an asbestos ticket. Do you 35 recall that? 36 A. Yes. 37 38 Q. Did you have a discussion with the WorkSafe inspectors 39 on the day about that issue? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. What was the response of the WorkSafe inspectors on 43 that issue? 44 A. We explained that they were complaining that Zvon did 45 not have an asbestos card, and I just stated that he did 46 and they said, "That's fine", so there was not much 47 response.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 747 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Were you speaking to Mr Alan Chipperfield, the 3 inspector? 4 A. The majority of the conversation was between myself 5 and Alan, yes. 6 7 Q. Did you discuss with Mr Chipperfield, or any other 8 WorkSafe inspector, the Union's concerns about the adequacy 9 of the traffic control system you had? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. What was the WorkSafe inspector's response on that 13 issue? 14 A. They asked to see our document, the temporary traffic 15 management plan, and they were happy with how we were 16 controlling the traffic. 17 18 Q. Did you have a discussion with the WorkSafe inspectors 19 about the issue as to whether the work deck had not been 20 signed off by a structural engineer? 21 A. Yes. I did have a conversation about them and showed 22 them the applicable documentation. 23 24 Q. What did they say as to that? 25 A. They were happy with it. 26 27 Q. Are you aware another issue raised by the Union was 28 that there was no electrician on site - I think they said 29 "possibly" on their note? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Did you discuss that issue with the inspectors? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. What did they say as to that? 36 A. They said, "Oh good, you've got one on site". 37 38 Q. I'm sorry? 39 A. They just said that - I said, "Yeah, we've got the 40 electrician on site", and they said, "Oh good, okay", yes. 41 42 Q. There was an issue again about there being no sign-in 43 register, do you recall that, raised by the Union? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. What's a sign-in register? 47 A. Basically, when you come on site in the morning,

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 748 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 you've just got to sign in to say that you're there just in 2 case we have an emergency, we know who is and is not on 3 site. 4 5 Q. Did you have a discussion with the WorkSafe inspectors 6 about that issue? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. What did they say about that? 10 A. With the sign-in register, initial conversations, they 11 were happy with it because we have a whiteboard system 12 where we have - at the time we did, we've recently changed 13 it, but, at the time, we had a number of concreters on site 14 and they also had their toolbox talk which had those 12 men 15 on that, but shortly after that, we realised that two of 16 them hadn't signed the Gungahlin SWMS, yes. 17 18 Q. As to whether the whiteboard system you had employed 19 was adequate or not, did they have a concern about -- 20 A. They were happy with that, yes. 21 22 Q. The WorkSafe inspectors arrived while the concrete 23 pour was taking place, correct? 24 A. Correct. 25 26 Q. Did you inspect the concrete pour taking place with 27 the inspectors? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. Including Mr Chipperfield? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. Did they observe the concrete pour taking place with 34 the concrete boom and hose, and the workers working around 35 that hose? 36 A. Yes. They did observe that, yes. 37 38 Q. Did you discuss the Union's concern that there should 39 be an exclusion zone underneath the concrete pouring nose? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. What did the inspectors say as to that? 43 A. They said that it's not practical, being that the boom 44 goes left to right on the slab and in and out. I mean, my 45 view on it was to the CFMEU at the time, "I'm not putting 46 my labourers at risk to install an exclusion zone". 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 749 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Did Mr Chipperfield say something about it? 2 A. Yes. He said, "Mate, you don't - it's not that you 3 don't - you're not allowed to never be under the pump." He 4 said, "It says that you've got to avoid working under the 5 boom." 6 7 Q. Was there any criticism of your system by the WorkSafe 8 inspectors? 9 A. No. 10 11 Q. Was there any notice received, or Improvement Notice, 12 or anything of that nature received afterwards in relation 13 to the way in which you were working with the concrete 14 pour? 15 A. No. 16 17 Q. The first-aid facility and its adequacy was raised by 18 the Union, correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. Did you have a discussion with the inspectors about 22 that? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. On the day? 26 A. Yes, and in fact -- 27 28 Q. What did they say? 29 A. -- one inspector on the day went down to double-check 30 that everything was in place in the first-aid shed. 31 32 Q. Did you receive any criticism from the inspectors 33 about the first-aid facilities? 34 A. No. 35 36 Q. Finally, as to the issue of the barrier and the 37 delineation between the plant, I think the truck and the 38 scaffolding -- 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. -- I think you gave some evidence that you had put 42 water barriers in place in response to an instruction from 43 your higher management to do so -- 44 A. Correct. 45 46 Q. -- on the day, and that at some point the WorkSafe 47 inspectors allowed you to remove some or most of those

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 750 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 barriers; is that correct? 2 A. That's correct. 3 4 Q. Did you have a subsequent visit from Mr Chipperfield 5 after 21 April? 6 A. Yes. Yes. 7 8 Q. When was that? 9 A. It was actually on the 28th. 10 11 Q. I see. 12 A. We requested him to come a little bit earlier just to 13 view the Gungahlin Concrete's amended SWMS, but he was busy 14 and he came on the 28th. 15 16 Q. Did he observe the water barriers you had put in place 17 on 21 April on that occasion? 18 A. No. 19 20 Q. Did you have the water barriers still in place at that 21 time? 22 A. On the 28th? 23 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. Did you say something to him about removing some of 28 those barriers? 29 A. Yes. Yes. 30 31 Q. What did he say? 32 A. He said, "Yeah, take them away, you don't need them". 33 34 Q. What was left in place, anything? 35 A. Nothing, no. 36 37 Q. Mr Beaumont, given WorkSafe's response to those issues 38 we've just discussed, did that suggest to you anything 39 about the Union's approach to safety at the site on the 40 21st? 41 42 MR AGIUS: I object to that. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin, technically, I think Mr Agius 45 has a point. You are really inviting conclusions that 46 I think can probably be drawn one way or the other by 47 anyone who has to decide the factual disputes. I am not

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 751 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 sure that Mr Beaumont's opinions, though I have generally 2 found them very interesting, are really permissible on that 3 topic. Have you any ground you want to advance to defend 4 the question? 5 6 MR CHIN: I might do so lightly, Commissioner. 7 Mr Beaumont has already given evidence as to how he 8 regarded the Union's approach to safety on the day. I am 9 simply examining him on the basis for that view. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: That evidence you refer to is that in 12 his statement or in -- 13 14 MR CHIN: Yes, Commissioner. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Which bit? 17 18 MR CHIN: Paragraph 25. It is the last part of the last 19 sentence beginning: 20 21 As I thought they were making things up to 22 try to disrupt or stop the concrete pour. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Just pause a moment before you 25 answer this question so Mr Agius can object if he likes, 26 Mr Beaumont. Do you have paragraph 25 of your statement 27 there? 28 A. No, I don't. 29 30 THE COMMISSIONER: Could he be shown it? 31 32 Q. It is on the screen. Do you see the words beginning 33 "I thought they were making things up"? 34 A. Sorry, the screen's not working. 35 36 Q. Mine is. That's unusual. Paragraph 25, the third 37 last line. My question is: on what basis did you have 38 that thought? 39 A. I really formed that thought from the first safety 40 issue they raised, which was that the handrail on the 41 flight of stairs. When they said that one, I thought 42 "You've got to be kidding, you really" - you know, and then 43 the second one was the formwork. Putting those two nails 44 in, they said, "Oh, that's a structural element", and I was 45 starting to form that view already, that they were there 46 just to disrupt. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 752 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 2 3 MR CHIN: I don't press the question, Commissioner. 4 5 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, very well. 6 7 MR CHIN: Thank you, Commissioner. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Chin. Yes, Mr Scruby? 10 11 MR SCRUBY: Nothing further. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Does anyone object to Mr Beaumont being 14 excused? 15 16 Mr Beaumont, thank you for attending on the summons. 17 You are excused from any further attendance on that 18 summons. You are free to leave now. 19 20 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 21 22

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 753 M J BEAUMONT (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 754 Z SESELJA (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Are the contents of the statement true and correct? 2 A. As far as I'm aware, yes. 3 4 MR SCRUBY: Could that be received into evidence, 5 Commissioner? 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: The statement will be received into 8 evidence without Mr Seselja's residential address. I 9 direct that that address not be published. 10 11 STATEMENT OF ZVONIMIR JOSEPH SESELJA DATED 17/07/2015 12 13 MR AGIUS: Commissioner, we have just one objection, 14 paragraph 12, commencing on the fourth line: 15 16 When I was told (I do not recall by 17 whom) ... 18 19 From there, to the end of the sentence. 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: Concluding "the project."? 22 23 MR AGIUS: Yes, concluding with the words "the project." 24 Yes. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: Ordinarily, I would let this in but, 27 Mr Scruby, Mr Agius has indicated that Mr Hall, in effect, 28 feels very strongly about this. In the circumstances, 29 perhaps it is better to be established by primary evidence 30 rather than hearsay. 31 32 MR SCRUBY: If it please the Commission. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: I will uphold that objection, Mr Agius. 35 36 MR AGIUS: May it please. 37 38 THE COMMISSIONER: I am not intending thereby to encourage 39 objections. 40 41 MR AGIUS: No. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Scruby? 44 45 MR SCRUBY: Q. Mr Seselja, I wanted to ask you about the 46 Easty Street Project and about what you say in 47 paragraphs 21 to 24 of your statement. Do you see there

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 755 Z SESELJA (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 you give some evidence about being contacted by Mr Kivalu? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. Did you have a conversation with Mr Hooper about your 5 conversations with Mr Kivalu? 6 A. I think so, yes. Back then I think I had a 7 conversation - yes, I think I did. 8 9 Q. Mr Hooper has given evidence that on 2 July 2013, you 10 contacted him and told him about a phone call that you had 11 with Mr Kivalu? 12 A. Sure. 13 14 Q. And he says apparently Mr Kivalu told you that if 15 Advanced Plumbing didn't sign the EBA, he was going to 16 attend the Easty Street Project the following day and shut 17 it down? 18 A. I don't remember the exact words, but I remember there 19 was a conversation like that with Mr Kivalu. 20 21 Q. Between you and Mr Kivalu? 22 A. That's correct. 23 24 Q. Was that something that you told Mr Hooper about? 25 A. I would have, yes. 26 27 Q. In paragraph 32, you refer to Dusty saying to one of 28 the worksite officials that they should chat to you about 29 not wearing steelcaps. You didn't have steelcaps on at the 30 time? 31 A. No, I didn't. 32 33 Q. You say in the last line: 34 35 I was wearing appropriate footwear being in 36 closed shoes for a manager. 37 38 Where was your normal workplace at this time? 39 A. In Milin's head office. 40 41 Q. Did you in fact own a pair steelcaps? 42 A. Yes, I carry some with me in the car normally. If I 43 need to do a site walk, I'll carry different shoes, 44 depending on what I'm wearing on the day. 45 46 Q. Did you have some in your car with you that day? 47 A. Yes, I believe I did.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 756 Z SESELJA (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 MR SCRUBY: I have nothing further. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 5 6 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 7 8

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 757 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. He was dressed in Union gear, though, wasn't he? 3 A. I can't recall what he was wearing at the time, but he 4 certainly didn't introduce himself. 5 6 Q. So if he is just a random standing on the street, do 7 you think it is okay to say "Who the fuck are you?"? 8 A. Absolutely. 9 10 Q. Tell me, is that the way you usually talk to Union 11 officials who come to sites that you're managing? 12 A. It depends what they're asking me, I suppose. 13 14 Q. Is there something offensive in that question, "Do you 15 have an asbestos ticket?"? 16 A. No, there's nothing offensive in that question. 17 18 Q. Well, why did you swear at him? 19 A. It's just the way I speak. I swear a lot. 20 21 Q. This issue about your not wearing steelcaps, you had 22 written, had you not, the PPE procedure for the site? 23 A. No, I don't think I had. 24 25 Q. You didn't. Who did? 26 A. I don't understand the question, sorry. 27 28 Q. Well, there is a practice on site, there is a document 29 which controls what is appropriate personal protection 30 equipment, vests, hats and footwear. Are you not aware of 31 that? 32 A. I'm aware of it but I didn't write it. I believe 33 Matrix may have written it. 34 35 Q. Do you know what it says about footwear for someone in 36 your position? 37 A. I can't recall the exact words, no: I'd imagine 38 "Safe protective footwear". 39 40 Q. So you know, then, that you were not wearing the sort 41 of footwear that you should have been wearing according to 42 the rules that applied to your own site? 43 A. No, I disagree. 44 45 MR CHIN: I object. The question presupposes or equates 46 the answer in the witness's previous question that he was 47 required to wear, or he imagined that the requirement was

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 758 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 to wear protective footwear. That equated with steelcap 2 boots which he wasn't wearing, I think. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: In my mind, the questions that arise 5 are as follows: 1. What do the rules say? If they say 6 something about the position of where one is, where was the 7 person in question? What do the rules say? 8 9 MR AGIUS: I don't have the rules. The witness has said 10 that he imagines that they will require protective 11 footwear. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: But where? Where is it to be worn? 14 15 MR AGIUS: I will ask him. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. 18 19 MR AGIUS: Q. What do they require about protective 20 footwear in terms of where it is to be worn? 21 A. If you are working on our sites, you need to have 22 protective footwear - appropriate protective footwear. 23 I don't know the exact wording, but on the site. Certainly 24 not on the footpath where I was, I don't imagine you need 25 to have protective footwear where I was. 26 27 Q. No, not on the footpath, but you had been on site? 28 A. I had not at that point, I don't believe. 29 30 Q. So you stayed out the front of the site right up until 31 paragraph 33 in your statement? 32 A. No, I didn't say that. I didn't go out on site. 33 I may have gone to the site office, but I certainly didn't 34 go on site, certainly didn't work on site and certainly 35 didn't go into the work area at the time. 36 37 Q. So you weren't on the site, but you went to the site 38 office? 39 A. I don't think I went to the site office even prior to 40 being asked by Dusty about my footwear. 41 42 Q. You don't say in your statement that he asked you 43 anything about your footwear? 44 A. You asked me that. 45 46 Q. Sorry, he asked you about whether you had an asbestos 47 ticket and you swore at him. He told you his name, and

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 759 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 nowhere there do you say anything about him asking you 2 about why you weren't wearing steelcaps? 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: What about paragraph 32? 5 6 THE WITNESS: It does, definitely. The last line of 32. 7 8 MR AGIUS: I'm sorry, I must have a different paragraph 32 9 because I don't see anything in paragraph 32 where he is 10 asking you why you're not wearing steelcaps. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: The topic is referred to, Mr Agius. 13 I think you're being a little pedantic. 14 15 MR AGIUS: Q. You say there you had written the safety 16 induction for the site. Had you written the safety 17 induction for the site? 18 A. I believe so, yes. 19 20 Q. Did that provide the rules in relation to what was 21 appropriate footwear? 22 A. It would have referred to our safety plan, definitely. 23 24 Q. Would it have referred to the rules in relation to 25 what was appropriate footwear? 26 A. I'm sure it would have. 27 28 Q. Well, you wrote it. 29 A. I didn't write the rules on the footwear. I wrote the 30 induction, referring to the rules on the site. 31 32 Q. Did you see at some stage prior to making your 33 statement on 17 July, the statement of Mr Beaumont? 34 A. I can't recall that I saw his statement. I may have. 35 36 Q. His statement is dated 15 July. 37 A. I don't know. I'm not sure. Sorry, what's the 38 question? 39 40 Q. The question was whether you had seen his statement. 41 I think you've answered that. 42 A. I don't recall. 43 44 Q. At paragraph 35, a matter that was raised with you 45 when you first started giving evidence, you say: 46 47 The WorkSafe officials did not issue any

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 760 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 notifications about safety faults with the 2 site, except a failure to record the 3 induction of a couple of workers. 4 5 What is your source of knowledge for that sentence? 6 A. Speaking to Mr Chipperfield on the day, outside the 7 site, I recall him indicating to me that that was the only 8 issue that we needed to address, and I think it was 9 addressed at the time. 10 11 Q. Did you ever see the workplace visit report that was 12 provided by Mr Chipperfield? 13 A. I believe I did. 14 15 Q. It refers to a number of matters. It's Annexure C to 16 Mr Milin's statement. It will shorten this if it might be 17 brought up. That is the document I am referring to. When 18 it comes up, I will ask you if you would just read it to 19 yourself and confirm that that is the document that you 20 saw. Is that the document you saw as the Workplace Visit 21 Report? 22 23 MR CHIN: Commissioner, may I rise just to object? 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 26 27 MR CHIN: In fairness to the witness, there may be some 28 confusion or lack of clarity about whether the witness is 29 referring to an Improvement Notice, which is a distinct 30 form of notice from the WorkSafe authority, as distinct 31 from the document being shown to the witness now. 32 33 MR AGIUS: That's why I am showing him this document. 34 That is why I have asked him whether that was the document 35 he saw. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: I have a different point which really 38 isn't an objection. I am speaking as a fairly primitive 39 person. If someone showed me a document, a piece of paper 40 two years ago, the chance of me recognising it two years 41 later would depend really on whether that piece of paper, 42 or something like it, was shown to me as distinct from 43 something on the screen. 44 45 Q. Would you prefer to see it in hardcopy or on the 46 screen? 47 A. I'd prefer to see the hard copy.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 761 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Here's mine, unless a clean hardcopy can be found 3 fairly quickly. I have written a few things on my copy but 4 they are illegible, so there's no problem. I think 5 Mr Chin, so you are in the general picture, drew attention 6 to a document a couple of pages later. 7 A. Sure. 8 9 Q. Look at the one that Mr Agius wants you to look at. 10 11 MR AGIUS: Q. Just to be fair to you, I will show you a 12 number of documents. The document I was referring to was 13 the Workplace Visit Report. You should be looking at a 14 page numbered 95 at the bottom right-hand corner and, at 15 the top, it should have a big Capital "C" and it should be 16 identical to the one on the screen. 17 A. Sure, yes. 18 19 Q. That is what I'm referring to as a Workplace Visit 20 Report. If you turn over, with the Commissioner's 21 permission, two pages to page 97, you will see another 22 WorkSafe document which is called an Improvement Notice. 23 You will see that it was served on the same day, 21 April 24 2015 at 12.25; that the recipient was Micah Beaumont. The 25 question I had asked you is whether you had seen the 26 previous document, the Workplace Visit Report. Let me 27 broaden that. Had you seen either of those documents 28 before you made your statement on 17 July this year? 29 A. I can't recall. I don't think so, but I can't recall. 30 31 Q. You don't recall you have seen either of them? 32 A. I don't recall I'd seen either of these particular 33 ones, but, look, I see a lot of forms, so I may have missed 34 it. 35 36 Q. You know what an Improvement Notice is? 37 A. Yes, I do. 38 39 Q. It has particular significance, does it not, because 40 it requires the recipient to improve whatever it is that 41 the WorkSafe inspectors have directed be improved? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. In other words, it requires corrective action? 45 A. Yes, that's correct. 46 47 Q. Looking at that document now, can you recall whether

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 762 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 or not you have ever seen that before you made your 2 statement? 3 A. I can't recall. 4 5 Q. The previous document on page 95, had you seen that 6 before you made your statement? 7 A. I've seen documents like these, but I can't recall 8 whether I've seen these ones. 9 10 Q. Could you just go to that document, perhaps the 11 original paper copy might be returned and I'll ask you to 12 look at the screen for present purposes. Do you see under 13 the heading "Inspector's Note", there are three lines of 14 introduction, and then the next line is: 15 16 On site WorkSafe inspectors met with 17 representatives of Milin Builders. It was 18 established that not all workers on site 19 had been inducted correctly. 20 21 Was it drawn to your attention whilst you were on site that 22 morning before WorkSafe left that not all workers on site 23 had been inducted correctly into the SWMS applicable to the 24 concrete pour? 25 A. It was drawn to my attention there was a problem with 26 that, yes. 27 28 Q. By WorkSafe? 29 A. I think it was by WorkSafe. It might have been by 30 Micah or Tony, I'm not sure. 31 32 Q. Was it drawn to your attention that all non-inducted 33 workers were removed from the deck and inducted correctly 34 to ensure compliance? 35 A. I can't recall that. 36 37 Q. Was it brought to your attention by WorkSafe that the 38 Gungahlin Concrete pumping work health and safety plan was 39 incomplete? 40 A. I can't recall the words they used, no. 41 42 Q. Well, words to that effect. 43 A. I can't recall whether they spoke to me about that or 44 not. I think they did, yes, but I don't know the words 45 they used. 46 47 Q. Did they speak to you about the delineation between

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 763 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 plant and scaffold not being sufficient at the vehicle 2 entry point? 3 A. I believe they spoke to me about the Union pointing 4 that out. 5 6 Q. Did you have any part in the decision to place 7 barriers at the vehicle entry point? 8 A. I'm a bit confused about where we're talking, but 9 I believe I said to Micah, it might have been later on or - 10 I don't know when it was, just to sort out any issues that 11 he had on site in that respect. 12 13 Q. Was anything said to you about the other two matters 14 beneath that: 15 16 Storage of timber and steel on formwork 17 frames. 18 19 Review access and egress to site office. 20 21 Did WorkSafe say anything to you about those matters? 22 A. I don't believe so. 23 24 Q. You have no recollection as to whether or not either 25 of those forms were brought to your attention by anybody 26 prior to the time that you made your statement? 27 A. They may have been, I just don't recall. 28 29 Q. Do you see the second document which is the 30 Improvement Notice? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. It doesn't refer to a failure to record the induction 34 of a couple of workers, does it? 35 A. No, it doesn't. 36 37 Q. Yet, your statement says: 38 39 WorkSafe did not issue any notifications 40 about safety faults with the site, except a 41 failure to record the induction of a couple 42 of workers. 43 44 Where did you get that from? 45 A. That was my understanding from speaking to 46 Mr Chipperfield. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 764 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. You say that the WorkSafe officials did not issue any 2 notifications. At what point in time were you speaking 3 there? 4 A. On the day. So, as far as I was aware, they didn't 5 issue any notifications on the day. 6 7 Q. Do you see that the second document, the 8 Improvement Notice, was issued on that day? 9 A. Yes, I do. 10 11 Q. Do you see -- 12 A. It was issued on - where is the second document? 13 I can't see it. 14 15 Q. Right at the top of the page, you should see a time 16 and date of service, "21/4/15" at 12.25pm. 17 A. Yes, that's right. I believe I'd left by about 18 8 o'clock that morning. 19 20 Q. So you didn't get that information in the first 21 sentence in your paragraph 35 from this document, did you? 22 A. I don't understand the question, sorry. 23 24 Q. Do you see that the document does not at all refer to 25 a failure to record the induction of a couple of workers? 26 Do you see that the Improvement Notice does not refer to 27 that? 28 A. Yes, I do. 29 30 Q. My question is, I'm putting it to you as a 31 proposition, that what you have recorded in the first 32 sentence of paragraph 35 of your statement obviously did 33 not come from this document? 34 A. No, I said I believed it came from Mr Chipperfield. 35 36 MR AGIUS: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. 37 38 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Agius. Mr Docking? 39 40 MR DOCKING: No, thank you, Commissioner, on the basis of 41 MFI-4, being the letter. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. I am not sure I follow that 44 point, actually. I really ought to make sure I do. You 45 say you have no questions on the basis of MFI-4? 46 47 MR DOCKING: The letter saying there was no new oral

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 765 Z SESELJA (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 evidence that touched upon my client. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Now I understand. Thank you. I am on 4 the same wavelength. 5 6 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 7 8 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Morison? 9 10 MR MORISON: No, thank you, Commissioner. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin? 13 14 MR CHIN: No, thank you, Commissioner. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Scruby? 17 18 MR SCRUBY: No. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: May the witness be excused? 21 22 MR SCRUBY: No objection. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Seselja, you are excused from any 25 further attendance on the summons that you responded to 26 when you came here. Thank you very much for giving up your 27 time to come today. You can leave the box now. 28 29 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 30 31

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 766 A R HOOK (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2015? 2 A. Correct. 3 4 Q. You've got a copy of that with you? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. Are the contents of that statement true and correct? 8 A. Yes. 9 10 MR SCRUBY: Could that be received into evidence? 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Hook's statement will be 13 received in evidence without the reference to his 14 residential address. I direct that that address not be 15 published. 16 17 STATEMENT OF ALAN RICHARD HOOK DATED 17/07/2015 18 19 MR SCRUBY: Q. Mr Hook, I wanted to ask you about 20 paragraph 8 of your statement. 21 A. Mmm-hmm. 22 23 Q. You refer there to a meeting with a CEPU 24 representative and you say you don't recall his name. 25 Could that have been Mr Poskus? 26 A. It could have been. 27 28 Q. But you don't recall either way, is that the position? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. You describe there an inspection of the site and you 32 say, "No issues were found". Does that mean that Mr Poskus 33 didn't raise any issues? 34 A. No, that does not mean that. He raised several what 35 he perceived were defects in safety. We rectified them on 36 the spot during the inspection, the inspection finished, he 37 gave us no notice. Therefore, I considered that all the 38 issues had been finalised. 39 40 Q. Just taking that in steps, you said he raised several 41 what he perceived were defects in safety. What were they? 42 A. I can't recall specifics on that one. There was 43 nothing - there was nothing that would receive a job 44 stoppage or a notice. As I said, most of the issues he 45 found were fixed within minutes, if not seconds. 46 47 Q. All right. You can't recall specifics. You say most

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 767 A R HOOK (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 of the issues he fixed were fixed within minutes. Were 2 there some that were not fixed within minutes? 3 A. No, they were all fixed before we even finished the 4 inspection. 5 6 Q. I think you said earlier that Ms Poskus - well, you 7 said, "He gave us no notice", that is the CEPU 8 representative gave you no notice? 9 A. Whoever the representative was. 10 11 Q. Do you mean by that he gave you no written document? 12 A. Correct, yes. 13 14 MR SCRUBY: I have nothing further, Commissioner. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Agius, any questions? 17 18 MR AGIUS: No. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Docking? 21 22 MR DOCKING: Yes, Commissioner. 23 24

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 768 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. Assume I am asking you about the one with the beard 2 and assume it is Mr Hanford, you had a chat to him at one 3 stage in the site office and you were sharing a joke with 4 him about what colour hardhat he should work with on site, 5 whether it be pink or black, do you remember that? 6 A. Ah, yes. I remember that conversation. 7 8 Q. And I am not suggesting anything untoward about it, 9 but you joked to Mr Hanford that he should perhaps wear a 10 pink hardhat when he went on site? 11 A. I said any colour, actually. Any colour but black. 12 13 Q. And that reflected that your contact with him was 14 good-hearted on both sides? So far as Mr Hanford is 15 concerned the -- 16 A. As far as I was concerned, we had a reasonable 17 relationship where we could discuss any safety issue or 18 matters on site, yes. 19 20 Q. There's what's called a supplementary statement of 21 his. Tell me when you have that in front of you, and 22 I want to go to the back page. It has "B" in the top 23 right-hand corner. 24 A. Top right. 25 26 Q. Do you have that page in front of you? 27 A. Page 2? 28 29 Q. I am looking at a supplementary statement of 30 Daniel Hanford, and on the very last page it has a big "B". 31 A. No, that's all right. Okay. Daniel Hanford. I'm 32 sorry, I had Mr Poskus's. Now, what page? The very back? 33 34 Q. Yes. I am sorry, it's still coming to you. 35 A. Is this it? (Indicates). 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Mr Hook, some people like looking 38 at the screen, other people like doing what you are doing, 39 which is to look at the actual hardcopy. 40 A. Thank you. 41 42 Q. I think you have now been given a new statement which 43 is a -- 44 A. Wow. 45 46 Q. -- supplementary statement. It is the last page of 47 that?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 769 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. I've seen it, yes. 2 3 MR DOCKING: Q. To try to confirm, this gentleman, did 4 you ever notice he has tattooed on one hand "Love" - 5 L-O-V-E? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. So you've never noticed what tattoos he had on any 9 knuckles of either hand? 10 A. That doesn't bother me, that stuff. 11 12 Q. From your experience on a construction site, no-one 13 would even think twice about whatever tattoos someone had 14 on them, would they? 15 A. I can't speak for other people. I can only speak for 16 myself. 17 18 Q. You, personally? 19 A. For me, personally, I'm not intimidated by tattoos or 20 anything like that. 21 22 Q. And you see a lot of tattoos on building sites? 23 A. I've seen them all around the world, yes. Not just on 24 sites. 25 26 Q. When you introduce yourself, you would introduce 27 yourself with the first name of "Dick"? 28 A. "Dick" or "Richard", yes. 29 30 Q. Have a look at the page with the "B" on the top 31 right-hand corner, I want to see if this prompts your 32 memory, that Mr Hanford was filling in a sheet when he 33 spoke to you? 34 A. I do not recall that, no. 35 36 Q. I'm not wanting to put the number on the record, but 37 do you see there's a mobile number below your name? 38 A. Correct. 39 40 Q. Was that your mobile number at the time? 41 A. Absolutely not. 42 43 Q. It's not? 44 A. No. 45 46 Q. Was it a work one? 47 A. Not.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 770 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Let's have a look then -- 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Just while we are on that, I direct 5 that the two phone numbers on that page not be published. 6 7 MR DOCKING: Yes. I am not going to read any of the 8 numbers. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: It is just for greater caution I said 11 that. 12 13 MR DOCKING: Q. Do you see there is a photocopy of a 14 business card on the right-hand side which has various 15 numbers, and I don't want to have those read on the record. 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. Do you recall that you handed him the card of 19 Tony Davey? 20 A. No. 21 22 Q. Can you recall one way or the other whether you did 23 provide at any stage to Mr Hanford the business card of 24 Tony Davey? 25 A. I would have provided him my own business card because 26 I do not carry Mr Davey's business cards with me. 27 28 Q. You do recognise that as a faithful photocopy of 29 Tony Davey's business card? 30 A. Correct. 31 32 Q. I just want to see if this prompts your recollection. 33 Mr Hanford as one of the visitors, or visits, I should say, 34 asked you - I will start from the bottom of the page - 35 what were the contact details of the electrical contractor? 36 A. I can't recall. Joe Tomiak was the electrical 37 contractor. The phone number, I couldn't tell you. 38 39 Q. Are you in a position you can't say one way or the 40 other whether he asked you for the name and the contact 41 telephone number of the hydraulic contractor? 42 A. No, I couldn't. 43 44 Q. I want to take you to his note which has the asterisk. 45 A. I've read that, yes. 46 47 Q. I suggest to you you originally had suggested to

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 771 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Mr Hanford that you were the project manager? 2 A. No, absolutely not. 3 4 Q. Do you recall on one occasion that Mr Hooper 5 approached you when you were talking to the CEPU official, 6 and perhaps refresh your memory by looking at paragraph 9 7 of your statement. 8 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. And you accept, even though you couldn't remember the 11 name when you did your statement, you do recall that 12 Mr Hooper was told by you, "Go away. Leave it to me, 13 Jason." 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. You don't dispute now that that was Mr Hanford, the 17 CEPU official who was there? 18 A. It was a CEPU official. You are telling me it is 19 Mr Hanford. I cannot confirm one way or the other. 20 21 Q. Who else on the site, from your general systems 22 knowledge - I accept you have no recollection, but who, by 23 way of systems, would have Mr Davey's card available to 24 hand it to Mr Hanford? 25 A. Mr Davey. 26 27 Q. Are you saying no-one else would have that card on 28 site? 29 A. No-one should carry - everyone should carry their own 30 card, not anyone's else. 31 32 Q. Again, I am not wanting you to read it on to the 33 record, do you see opposite "Project/Site Manager", there 34 is a name and then a mobile number. Do you know if that 35 was the mobile telephone number of anyone on site at the 36 time? 37 A. Now, you've come back to the -- 38 39 Q. Handwriting. 40 A. And which one are you talking to me about? The Tony 41 Davey -- 42 43 Q. Immediately below that there is a mobile number. Have 44 a look at the card. 45 A. Yes. I'm looking at that. 46 47 Q. Was that Mr Davey's number?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 772 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. It appears they're both the same, yes. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just extend the direction I made 4 before. I direct that all the phone numbers, facsimile 5 numbers and email addresses on that page not be published. 6 7 MR DOCKING: Q. So far as Mr Hanford is concerned, any 8 dealings you had with him were mutually acceptable; there 9 were no difficulties? 10 A. Well, when a union bloke wants to do a safety 11 inspection, there's always the occasional he sees this, 12 I see that, but overall, everything was resolved before he 13 left and there was no - I thought we'd built a reasonable 14 rapport. 15 16 Q. I suggest to you Mr Hanford never, ever, did a safety 17 inspection at the Easty Street site? 18 A. Well, as I said to you, I couldn't tell you if it was 19 Mr Hanford or who it was. 20 21 Q. I then want to go to both paragraphs 7 and 8 of your 22 own statement. Counsel Assisting asked you about 23 paragraph 8. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. Do you have those two paragraphs in front of you? 27 A. Now you're after my statement. Yes. 28 29 Q. I suggest to you that you are confused when Mr Poskus 30 attended and that he didn't attend twice, he only ever 31 attended once at the Easty Street Project? 32 A. I don't see Mr Poskus's name on my statement at all. 33 34 Q. Is it the case that you are unable to identify in the 35 witness box who was the CEPU official referred to in 36 paragraph 7 or paragraph 8? 37 A. It was a CEPU official, that's all I can tell you. 38 39 Q. Are you able to shed any light at all as to whether a 40 CEPU official attended that site on 3 July 2013? 41 A. A CEPU official attended site sometime in July. 42 I don't have - that's it. That's all I can confirm. 43 44 Q. Do you remember that a CEPU official came on to site, 45 approached you as the appropriate person, and explained he 46 had some concerns that there may be some health and safety 47 contraventions on site?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 773 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I can't recall the specifics of it, but if a Union 2 official approaches me with concerns about safety on site 3 and wants to do a site inspection, I'm quite willing to 4 attend. 5 6 Q. Because at all times with the CEPU - I am talking 7 about the Plumbing Division - you had a healthy 8 relationship; if they raised safety concerns, you were 9 happy to go and look at them and find out if they needed 10 action or not? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. And you've never been on a site - I am only talking 14 about the plumbers - where they have ever tried to 15 intimidate you? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. That they have never tried to bully you? 19 A. No. 20 21 Q. How long have you worked in the ACT for? 22 A. Since 1973. 23 24 Q. And working in that environment, if the CEPU 25 plumbers - and that is who I'm talking about, no other 26 Union - engaged in such conduct, you would expect to hear 27 about it? 28 A. Can you repeat the question, please? 29 30 Q. If they did engage in any bullying or intimidation at 31 a work site, I am talking about the CEPU plumbers, you 32 would expect to have heard about that? 33 A. I would assume so, yes. 34 35 Q. And you have never heard any suggestion that they 36 have, as a matter of fact, intimidated anybody at a 37 building site in the ACT, have you, being the CEPU 38 plumbers? 39 A. No. 40 41 Q. Sometimes people who work in the plumbing or building 42 industry refer to this as a small town. So far as people 43 who do the construction work and plumbing work, they tend 44 to know who each other are? 45 A. Yes, it is a small jurisdiction. 46 47 Q. Might I show the witness Beaumont MFI-3. Have you got

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 774 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 a hardcopy in front of you of the document? 2 A. (Indicates). 3 4 Q. Thank you. What I am wanting to raise with you is 5 when a CEPU official attended site, specifically on 3 July 6 2013, that official handed to you a document comprising 7 that form, except details had been filled in; that is, the 8 suspicions had been filled in by that official? 9 A. No. 10 11 Q. And that official was Mr Luke Poskus? 12 A. I'll believe you. 13 14 Q. What occurred is after a discussion, it was agreed a 15 safety walk would take place? 16 A. I can't recall the specifics of that. 17 18 Q. I will see if this prompts your memory. Nearby your 19 site office - I'll call him "Luke" - he observed that there 20 was a power box with holes in it which permitted access to 21 the energised parts of the powerboard. Do you remember 22 that? 23 A. Oh, not specifically, no, but I'll take your word for 24 it. 25 26 Q. It's not something you deny? 27 A. I can't recall it. 28 29 Q. You've got his statement, his first statement. 30 Hopefully there is still a yellow Post-It note on it. 31 I want to take you to the New South Wales WorkCover Fact 32 Sheet. Does it have a yellow Post-It note on it still? 33 A. (Indicates). Give me a direction? How far in? 34 35 Q. Mr Poskus's first statement. I will hold it up. It 36 has: 37 38 WorkCover Facts Sheet - 39 Electrical Practices - Construction and 40 Demolition Sites. 41 42 Do you have that open in front of you? 43 A. No, I don't, but anyway, I'll accept your word for it. 44 45 Q. Perhaps it could be alternatively put up on the screen 46 or do you prefer the paper copy? 47 A. Mate, I'll look at the screen. That'll do me. Thank

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 775 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 you. 2 3 Q. Thank you. It is now on the screen. I am drawing 4 upon your considerable experience as a safety officer. Are 5 you familiar with, if you look at the reference about a 6 quarter of the way down, Australian Standard 3012:2010? 7 A. Yes, I am aware of it. 8 9 Q. And that it is picked up by clause 163 of the 10 Regulation, are you familiar with that? 11 A. I couldn't tell you the clause number, no. I'm not 12 that familiar with work health safety legislation that 13 I can quote clauses at you. 14 15 Q. But it is something you have access to in your job to 16 check? 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. What I want to take you to is the next page. Tell me 20 when you've found the heading "Switchboard Construction"? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. The third got point, do you see it says: 24 25 Energised (live) parts must be effectively 26 protected at all times against contact by 27 workers. 28 29 A. Yes, correct. 30 31 Q. In your experience, that has been a known cause of 32 fatalities, that workers have been able to get contact to 33 those energised or live parts on construction sites? 34 A. People have been electrocuted on sites by contacting 35 energised equipment, yes. 36 37 Q. And if one saw the power box with holes in it which 38 permitted access, you would accept that is something that 39 would have to be rectified? 40 A. Correct. 41 42 Q. You can't just recall in the witness box today, one 43 way or the other, whether that is something Mr Poskus 44 pointed out on an inspection, I suggest to you, took place 45 3 July 2013? 46 A. I cannot recall specifics, put it that way. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 776 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. And you can't deny it? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. I want to see if you are able to say one way or the 5 other. He attended site and after talking to you, pointed 6 out concerns. That people had been walking in front of 7 moving plant was a complaint he got; so that was one reason 8 he wanted to do the safety walk? 9 A. Again, if a Union official comes to me with complaints 10 about safety on the site, I'm willing to let him inspect 11 the site with me, any time. 12 13 Q. You understand the arrangement is that the Act and 14 Regulations requires him to be accompanied by you and other 15 personnel from the principal contractor? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. And you're not denying that is what happened on 3 July 19 2013? 20 A. I'm not aware of the legislation, but I am aware that 21 we accompanied him. To find out what my attitude is, if he 22 finds something that's unsafe, unsatisfactory, I will get 23 it resolved there and then, which I did. 24 25 Q. And you just simply don't deny that he pointed out 26 that problem about people had been walking in front of 27 moving plant? 28 A. On that site we had a policy that we segregated moving 29 plant from people by putting up power webbing, fencing, 30 some form to delineate the work areas. 31 32 Q. It is a known cause of deaths and serious injuries on 33 construction sites, people being hit by moving plant, isn't 34 it? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. And it would be a valid reason for someone like a CEPU 38 official to come on site, to raise that concern with you 39 and to see if it is an actual problem on the site? 40 A. He would raise that as a concern, and I have no 41 objection to him attending site to see if it's valid or if 42 it's an untruth. 43 44 Q. I then want to see if this prompts your memory for 45 3 July 2013. He also raised a concern about falling from 46 heights, that there was an incomplete handrail system that 47 had not been properly installed as per the engineer's test

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 777 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 report on the formwork. Can you deny one way or the other 2 that was one of his suspicions that he wanted looked at? 3 A. There was an area near some stairs I remember, just a 4 one-off, where he complained about people working 5 underneath an incomplete scaffold. That's not an unusual 6 complaint. 7 8 Q. I just want to draw on your practical experience. 9 Scaffolding might go up to at least - I will just deal with 10 a first floor level. Scaffolding can be in place to go and 11 protect a first floor of the construction? 12 A. Correct, it can. 13 14 Q. And what height would that first floor be? 15 A. Approximately 3 metres if it was a first floor. 16 17 Q. You need a combination of kickboards, mid-rails and 18 handrails for a number of purposes. The first is to stop 19 items being kicked or knocked off that level and hitting 20 people below? 21 A. Correct. 22 23 Q. Falling objects is a notorious risk in the 24 construction industry? 25 A. It is one of the many. 26 27 Q. And the other purpose for that system of kickboards, 28 mid-rails and handrails, that is also notorious, is to stop 29 people falling from heights? 30 A. Correct. 31 32 Q. So you never just have that system just for the 33 falling objects risk, you also have it to stop people 34 falling from heights, don't you? 35 A. Correct. 36 37 Q. And I suggest that was one of the concerns that was 38 investigated during the safety walk, whether the protection 39 system was fully installed as per the engineer's 40 certificate, or test report? 41 A. Are you saying there was no handrails on the site? 42 43 Q. I am saying that was what was being investigated, to 44 see if they were properly installed? 45 A. The handrails were properly installed. 46 47 Q. So, does that help you recall it was one of the

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 778 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 matters that he raised? 2 A. There was a - there were holds missing off one part of 3 the scaffold where individuals were working. The area had 4 been cleaned of all loose material - we had done a risk 5 assessment. A toe-board was designed to prevent loose 6 material being kicked down on to people below. We had 7 mid-rail, the top rail, and we had removed the kickboard 8 because the persons were working there installing something 9 against where the kickboard would be. So, when they had 10 finished the work, there was actually a replacement. 11 12 Q. So you do have some recollection now of work being 13 required? 14 A. There was one or two instances. I remember the 15 argument about the black hat. 16 17 Q. But that is quite separate, that being Mr Hanford, 18 someone completely different to what I'm talking about, 19 isn't it? 20 A. But there was a situation where there was a toe-board 21 that we had removed so they could continue the work, and we 22 had done a risk assessment and put into place measures to 23 remove and mitigate any possible risk. 24 25 Q. Is it the case, while Mr Poskus was there, the work 26 stopped and it was fixed? 27 A. There and then, absolutely. 28 29 Q. So, you had no issue with that being raised and 30 getting addressed, there and then? 31 A. We didn't put a toe-board on, if that's what you're 32 saying. We left the toe-board free because the blokes had 33 to do the work in that area. 34 35 Q. In your experience, you never talk about there just 36 being minor safety breaches when you're talking about fall 37 from height protection or falling objects projection? 38 A. Yes, you do. 39 40 Q. Do you? Do you classify some as being minor safety 41 breaches? 42 A. If you fall down a single step, is it the same as 43 falling six storeys? I put that to you. 44 45 Q. I'm sorry, I'm dealing with the 3 metre example you 46 have -- 47 A. I didn't give you a three - you gave me the 3 metre

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 779 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 example of a first floor fall. I haven't. You did. 2 3 Q. Yes. You defined it was 3 metres, the first floor. 4 I'm asking you about that. That would never be considered 5 a minor breach, whether it be a falling from heights risk 6 or a falling objects risk when 3 metres is involved? 7 A. Not when 3 metres is involved, no. 8 9 Q. I want to see if this assists you. That also what he 10 raised on 3 July 2013 is concerns about ingress and egress? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. Can you tell us what you recall of those concerns now 14 in the witness box? 15 A. There was material stacked in a walkway and it had to 16 be moved. I asked the bloke who stacked it there to move 17 it, that was it. 18 19 Q. Was this near something called sometimes by some of 20 the builders or construction workers "falsework", which was 21 a temporary structure supporting a permanent structure? 22 A. It was through the falsework which is used to support 23 the formwork. 24 25 Q. The formwork is used to pour the concrete so you have 26 the false work to support it -- 27 A. You have the falsework -- 28 29 Q. -- during the concrete pour? 30 A. You have the falsework which is the frames, props, and 31 the like, supporting the formwork which is your plywood and 32 that, which holds the concrete into place so it can be 33 poured, yes. 34 35 Q. And you agree that there had been at least one issue 36 identified by the CEPU official, and it got addressed, in 37 that area, near the falsework? 38 A. If there was a blocked walkway, I would address it 39 anywhere. It didn't matter who addressed it, whether it 40 was CEPU or myself. 41 42 Q. Building sites are constantly dynamic and during the 43 course of a working shift, risks can arise during that 44 swift? 45 A. Can you restate that question, please? 46 47 Q. Even if you have paper systems in place, there needs

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 780 A R HOOK (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 to be constant monitoring and enforcement during the 2 construction day, to make sure the safety measures are 3 actually being implemented? 4 A. Yes, there has to be some reinforcement to assist the 5 workers. 6 7 Q. And going to this issue, can you remember he also 8 raised about this egress and ingress concern, that one area 9 was dimly lit? 10 A. That's an egress and access problem, but I don't 11 remember that one specifically, no. 12 13 Q. In the witness box today, you can't say one way or the 14 other whether that was raised at the time? 15 A. Correct. 16 17 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Docking. Mr Morison? 20 21 MR MORISON: No, thank you, Commissioner. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Chin? 24 25 MR CHIN: Just briefly, Mr Commissioner, thank you. 26 27

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 781 A R HOOK (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 MR SCRUBY: Just one matter. 3 4

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 782 A R HOOK (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 MR SCRUBY: Thank you. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: No-one objects to Mr Hook being 5 excused, I presume? 6 7 Mr Hook, you are excused from further attendance on 8 the summons. 9 10 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much, Commissioner. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you for your assistance. You can 13 leave the witness box. 14 15

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 783 A C DAVEY (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Are the contents of that statement true and correct? 4 A. They are. 5 6 MR SCRUBY: Could that be received into evidence, 7 Commissioner? 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. It will be received into evidence 10 without the reference to the residential address. I direct 11 that that residential address not be published. 12 13 STATEMENT OF ANTHONY CHARLES DAVEY DATED 15/07/2015 14 15 MR SCRUBY: Q. Mr Davey, in paragraph 12, you refer to a 16 conversation with Mr Miller in the site office. Do you 17 recall being asked by Mr Vitler to photocopy any documents 18 for the CFMEU? 19 A. No, I was - Mr Vitler never told me, or never 20 requested to use the photocopier, but at one time I did 21 tell him to get away from the photocopier. 22 23 Q. Did he ever ask you to photocopy documents? 24 A. He didn't request any documents, and didn't ask 25 whether he could use the photocopier, no. 26 27 Q. Did anyone ask you to photocopy documents for the 28 CFMEU? 29 A. No. No, they didn't. 30 31 Q. Do you know if the CFMEU asked any other Milin 32 employees to photocopy documents? 33 A. I do not know, no. 34 35 MR SCRUBY: I have nothing further. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 38 39 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 40 41

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 784 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. You were there at 7.40 and by 7.45, you had made your 4 way to your office? 5 A. Sorry, I walked - I parked the car and walked straight 6 up to my office. 7 8 Q. Between parking your car and reaching your office, did 9 you meet with anybody, and were you given any version of 10 what had been happening that morning? 11 A. No. I'd been - we received a phone call two streets 12 away and we'd heard that the Union were site and we called 13 the police. 14 15 Q. So you called the police even before you arrived at 16 the site? 17 A. Yes, the police had been called prior to me being on 18 the site, yes. 19 20 Q. Do you know who called the police? 21 A. Yes. Micah - Micah Beaumont called the police. 22 23 Q. Did he speak to you about calling the police before he 24 called them? 25 A. No, he did not. 26 27 Q. Leaving aside calling the police, you went straight to 28 your office? 29 A. That's right. 30 31 Q. So nobody told you what the Union had or had not been 32 doing on the site before you got to your office? 33 A. No. I wasn't informed, no. 34 35 Q. And nobody told you that the CFMEU had issued any 36 notices? 37 A. No. 38 39 Q. Any notice of suspected safety breaches? 40 A. I can't recall, to be honest, when I actually saw the 41 notice. I think I was already in my site shed before I saw 42 any notice. 43 44 Q. In your office? 45 A. In my office, yes. 46 47 Q. Did things occur like this: that you arrived and you

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 785 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 said to the Union officers who were there, words to the 2 effect, "What are you doing here?"? 3 A. No. 4 5 Q. And they said to you, "Going through some issues 6 relating to safety"? 7 A. There was three of them in my office, and as I walk 8 into my office, they're sort of to my right and they start 9 having safety issues. I walked to my desk, they're still 10 having a go at me over safety issue, and I tell them I'm 11 ringing Fair Work Australia. I was just - I was trying to 12 keep my head and I thought the person I should ring is 13 Fair Work Australia. I had my - safety officer was running 14 around trying to get paperwork for those three, so that's 15 exactly what I did. I tried to ring Fair Work Australia, 16 I couldn't get through, so then I collected my thoughts and 17 turned around and talked to them. 18 19 Q. I am suggesting that you said to them words to the 20 effect, "What are you doing here?", and they told you that 21 they were looking at issues relating to safety? 22 A. I don't recall that, but that could happen. It's 23 not - I would have said - yes, it could have. 24 25 Q. And I suggest that they said to you - in fact, one of 26 them, Mr Zach Smith - do you know him? 27 A. Yes, I know Zach. 28 29 Q. That Zach said to you words to the effect, I'm not 30 saying these are the precise words, but just the substance 31 of what he said to you in relation to the safety issues, he 32 said, "They're identified in this notice", and he pointed 33 to a notice which the Union had issued and said to you that 34 they'd been discussing the notice with Colin and Micah? 35 A. Yes, that could have happened, yes. 36 37 Q. Do you remember seeing the notice in your office? 38 A. I definitely saw the notice that day, yes. 39 40 Q. What about in your office at this time, in the 41 morning, shortly after you had arrived? 42 A. I was shortly given a second notice so I'm - I saw 43 roughly - I roughly saw the two notices roughly at the same 44 time, I think. 45 46 Q. Was that before or after you tried to call Fair Work 47 Australia?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 786 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. I honestly think I just went over to my desk and 2 I tried to ring Fair Work Australia first because I was 3 just a bit - I mean, you walk into a little office, you've 4 got three guys sitting in there and I was - yes, I walked 5 over to my desk, I sat there; I just wanted a bit of 6 direction what to do in this situation. 7 8 Q. And that is why you were calling Fair Work Australia, 9 to find out what the legal situation was? 10 A. Yes. I understood we'd already called the police. I 11 was just looking for some direction of what to do in this 12 situation. 13 14 Q. Did you know what the right of entry rules were under 15 the Work Health and Safety Act? 16 A. I believe I did. You present a notice and we go for a 17 walk with you to - we investigate what's on the notice. 18 19 Q. So you appreciate that at that time, if a Union 20 official had a permit under the Work Health and Safety Act, 21 and also held a permit under the Federal Act, and they 22 reasonably suspected that there had been a safety breach on 23 site - either that there had been one or one was occurring 24 at that time - that they had a legal right to enter the 25 site, did you know that? 26 A. Yes, I knew that, but - yes. I knew that, but to sort 27 of - like, I have never sort of sent the CFMEU away over 28 safety, but to turn up with five guys on a poor day, it was 29 their manner, I think, was the reason why Micah rang the 30 police. 31 32 Q. You see, you said to them, as you have said in your 33 statement, in effect, "Has anyone told you to leave? You 34 are now officially being told to leave"? 35 A. Well, that's right. I mean, we'd asked them to leave. 36 We'd obviously called the police, so we've told them to 37 leave. 38 39 Q. Do you know that if they had a reasonable suspicion 40 that there had been, or that there was then occurring a 41 safety breach, and provided they had the appropriate 42 permits, they had a right to be there? Did you know that? 43 A. I'm not sure on that. 44 45 Q. Did you know that it was an offence to obstruct 46 somebody in that position, somebody who had proper permits, 47 and a reason to believe that a safety breach had been or

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 787 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 was being committed? 2 A. Yes, I believe we'd followed all the processes and 3 we'd disputed all their issues. There were no issues. 4 5 Q. But you hadn't had time to dispute anything, had you? 6 Didn't this happen within a few minutes of you arriving at 7 the site? That is, within a few minutes of you arriving at 8 the site, you were officially telling them to leave? 9 A. All right, yes. That's exactly what happened, yes. 10 11 Q. And nobody has told you anything about what safety 12 issues were being investigated? 13 A. I suppose I overheard on the phone and on going 14 towards site, me and Zvon were talking in the car, so I was 15 pretty much aware of what the issue was. 16 17 Q. What were you aware of? 18 A. What was on their first lot of issues? Oh, I can't 19 recall. I honestly can't recall. 20 21 Q. When you say it was on their first lot of issues, had 22 you been told what the content of their first certificate 23 was? 24 A. No. I think the first one, I think Micah, which 25 I overheard, was they're being aggressive about the 26 formwork and I think - "Well, I've got all the paperwork; 27 it's to do with a hob", you know, and a few items - yeah, 28 I'm - that's as much as I recall. 29 30 Q. Were you told that they had issues about the 31 delineation or a barrier between plant and scaffold? 32 A. No, not until much later in the day, until later. 33 34 Q. Were you told, and I am just reading from their first 35 notice, that they had issues with traffic management? 36 A. Yes, that's true. As soon as I read that first 37 notice, I would have understood their first lot of issues. 38 39 Q. And you understood that they had issues about the 40 formwork -- 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. -- which was being attended to after the engineer had 44 signed off? 45 A. Yes, but then I found out what that was about. 46 47 Q. And they had issues about scaffolding being blocked,

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 788 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 did you know all of those things before you told them to 2 leave? 3 A. I understood - I don't know. Not in any great detail, 4 no. 5 6 Q. Well, in any detail at all? 7 A. The formwork one I definitely understood. 8 9 Q. You see, later -- 10 A. I just don't think it is polite to stomp into people's 11 office, that's the thing. I mean there's a way of doing 12 things and I've bean in the industry for a long time and 13 I've -- 14 15 Q. How do you know that they stomped into your office if 16 you weren't there at the time -- 17 A. Well, they're in my office and I certainly didn't 18 invite them in there. 19 20 Q. But do you know that they were discussing matters with 21 Colin, your safety officer -- 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. -- in your office? 25 A. Yes. Colin was there, yes. 26 27 Q. Before you arrived? 28 A. That's right. 29 30 Q. So for all you know, they had been invited into that 31 office by Colin? 32 A. All right. I certainly knew that wasn't the case. 33 34 Q. How did you know that wasn't the case? 35 A. Micah had said he'd already rung the police because 36 they're being aggressive, so - not to me, but this is 37 relayed to me by Zvon. 38 39 Q. I suggest to you that you were not interested in any 40 of the safety issues they were investigating, and you just 41 wanted them off the site? 42 A. No. I'm very interested in safety issues. 43 44 Q. Why then, without investigating the safety issues that 45 they had notified, did you tell them to leave? 46 A. I think they were using the safety issues to shutdown 47 my - shutdown the pour and distract my staff.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 789 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. The safety issues turned out to be quite significant, 3 didn't they? 4 A. I don't agree with that. We were given one 5 Improvement Notice - one item on an Improvement Notice. 6 7 Q. What was the improvement you were given? 8 A. I think I've written it. It was actually Gungahlin's 9 site safety plan was incomplete. 10 11 Q. But aside from that you also learnt, didn't you, that 12 Gungahlin Concrete had two people on site, on the formwork, 13 who had not been signed into their SafeWork Method 14 Statements? 15 A. That's - they hadn't started work, but they hadn't 16 signed into the site specific site safety plan, no. 17 18 Q. They were up on the formwork getting ready to pour 19 concrete? 20 A. Yes. No-one had - that's correct. 21 22 Q. They hadn't started to pour, is that what you say -- 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. -- when this was discovered? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. And then everybody was made to be inducted again? 29 A. That's right. 30 31 Q. That's a significant matter, isn't it? 32 A. Oh, it's not ideal, but - yeah, it's not ideal, yes. 33 34 Q. Leaving aside whether or not it's ideal, it's 35 significant, isn't it, if two workers, who are about to 36 conduct a pour, have not been inducted -- 37 A. They had been inducted to the site. They hadn't 38 signed into the SWMS, in the specific site safety plan. 39 40 Q. There is a huge difference between being inducted into 41 a site and being inducted into a site specific safety plan 42 in relation to a concrete pour; isn't that right? 43 A. Sorry, repeat the question? 44 45 Q. There is a huge difference between being inducted into 46 a site and being inducted into a SWMS document in relation 47 to the pouring of concrete?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 790 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 A. Yes. I'd agree with that, yes. 2 3 Q. They're two entirely different matters, aren't they? 4 A. They are, yes. 5 6 Q. They deal with different risks? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. And if you're inducted into a site, you may know 10 nothing at all about the site's SWMS arrangements for the 11 concrete pour? 12 A. That's right. They sign into their own SWMS. 13 14 Q. Yes. So they had been inducted into the site, as 15 everything must be if they're working on a site; is that 16 right? 17 A. That's right. 18 19 Q. But they hadn't been properly inducted into the SWMS 20 document which controlled the concrete pour; isn't that 21 right? 22 A. They hadn't been inducted into their own site specific 23 form - plan, yes. 24 25 Q. And they were up waiting to start the pour? 26 A. That's right. 27 28 Q. That's a very serious breach of safety, isn't it? 29 A. I don't think so, no. 30 31 Q. You don't think so. You don't think -- 32 A. I think it's - you're not allowed to say "minor" for 33 safety, but I don't think so. Once we understood that they 34 hadn't been signed in, I believe they were signed into 35 their SWMS again and everybody was re-inducted. 36 37 Q. But it was the Union that discovered that, wasn't it? 38 A. Yes, but they didn't discover it from the road. They 39 discovered it because my safety manager gave them the site 40 specific plan. 41 42 Q. I am not suggesting that they discovered that from the 43 road. What they discovered from the road, amongst other 44 things, was the lack of a barrier between plant and 45 scaffold, that was visible from the road, wasn't it? 46 A. No. As has been explained, we had a raised slab 47 2 metres way from the scaffold that acts as a barrier

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 791 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 between the plant and the scaffold. 2 3 Q. You have said in your statement that "WorkSafe 4 suggested, and we agreed, to place concrete barriers at the 5 two entry points to provide better delineation between the 6 plant and the scaffold." 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. You don't want to withdraw that, do you? 10 A. I think I need to clarify that, though, over what's 11 happened and what I've listened to today. What happened 12 on - I wasn't involved in the detail of that until the end 13 of the day. Micah came to see me and said, "Zvon says we 14 need to put up the barricade in the buffer zone, it's not 15 required", and we just agreed, "Just do it", put it up the 16 whole way along, and management said, "Do it". 17 18 Q. Do you say as a result of what you've heard today -- 19 A. Oh, there's a discrepancy, but the issue the Union was 20 picking up was the buffer between the concrete pump and the 21 scaffold where I think WorkSafe were getting to a buffer on 22 either entry - either entry to the site. 23 24 Q. That's what you think, is it? 25 A. That's what I think. 26 27 Q. Upon what do you base your thought that the Union was 28 interested in a buffer between the concrete pump and the 29 scaffold? 30 A. Only the fact they turned up during a pour. That's my 31 only - that's why -- 32 33 Q. But the pour hadn't commenced? 34 A. No, but the pump was setting up at the time. 35 36 Q. Nevertheless, you say in your statement: 37 38 They also suggested ... 39 40 -- being WorkSafe -- 41 42 ... and we agreed, to place concrete 43 barriers at the two entry points to provide 44 better delineation between the plant and 45 the scaffold. 46 47 A. Yes, and I read that off the WorkSafe Visit Notice

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 792 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 I received, but what I remember was spending money on 2 barriers to block that thing off. 3 4 Q. What I am putting to you is that that suggestion 5 related to work which could be seen from the street? You 6 don't follow that? 7 A. Yes, no, you see where the concrete plan is from the 8 street. 9 10 Q. And you can see the absence of concrete barriers at 11 the two entry points from the street, can't you? 12 A. Yes, but the concrete barriers of the two entry points 13 would not protect the building from the concrete pump or 14 the concrete deliveries. Once the pump has gone and the 15 trucks have gone, it would protect the scaffold from any 16 deliveries going up - either down the driveway or up the 17 edge of the building. 18 19 Q. These concrete trucks - I think the technical name for 20 them is "agitators"? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. These agitators had to reverse from their waiting area 24 across a piece of public road, and then through an entrance 25 to the building? 26 A. That's right. 27 28 Q. To the site? 29 A. That's right. 30 31 Q. One of those entrances was used by the agitators? 32 A. That's right. 33 34 Q. And that was one of the entrances where you had agreed 35 to place concrete barriers? 36 A. That's right. 37 38 Q. Were you aware that at the time there was no spotter 39 guiding the agitators in through that entrance? When I say 40 "at the time", I am talking about that morning whilst the 41 Union officials were at the site? 42 A. As I said, usually it's road traffic guides that guide 43 in off the road, and the pump operator calls him in and 44 blows the horn. They've got a procedure to manage that. 45 46 Q. What about my question? 47 A. Sorry?

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 793 A C DAVEY (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. You don't know what that was an answer to? 3 A. No, please repeat the question. 4 5 Q. What I put to you was: 6 7 Were you aware that at the time there was 8 no spotter guiding the agitators in through 9 that entrance? When I say "at the time", I 10 am talking about that morning whilst the 11 Union officials were at the site? 12 13 A. No, sorry, I'm not - I was not aware. 14 15 Q. That could be quite dangerous, could it not, if a 16 reversing, agitating truck, without the assistance of a 17 spotter, made a misjudgment and crashed into the material 18 in the vicinity of the entrance to the site? 19 A. No argument. 20 21 Q. I take it that that was one of the reasons why you 22 agreed to place concrete barriers at the two entry points? 23 A. I basically did it just - I tried to make our site as 24 safe as possible. So, whatever WorkSafe suggests, if we 25 can do it, we do it. 26 27 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Agius. Mr Docking? 30 31 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 32 33

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 794 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 and Mr Poskus's third statement. On this occasion, if it 2 helps, I can provide clean copies if Counsel Assisting has 3 no objection. Whilst those are coming to you, I just want 4 to clarify some dates on your first page. Do you see in 5 paragraph 5 you say, "In about mid-2013"? 6 A. Yes. I mean -- 7 8 Q. Can you just provide, as best you can, what month 9 you're referring to? 10 A. I believe it's about July, towards the - sometime in 11 the middle of winter. 12 13 Q. How did you learn to know the name of the CEPU 14 official described in paragraph 5? 15 A. Off witness statements. I'd forgotten their names 16 prior to witness statements. 17 18 Q. I am not criticising you, but you read all of 19 Mr Poskus's first witness statement, did you? 20 A. I did, yes. 21 22 Q. I'm sorry, I withdraw that. I don't think you could 23 have because it wasn't served at that stage. 24 A. Oh, well, I'm sorry. I read something -- 25 26 Q. Had you read someone else's? 27 A. I've read somebody's, yes; I've read Poskus's. 28 29 Q. Have you read his statements before getting in the 30 witness box today? 31 A. Yes. I skimmed them. Not in detail. 32 33 Q. If you look at paragraph 7, what date are you 34 attributing that event to? 35 A. Where I attribute it to July, I know when Mr Hanford 36 came on site, I had done a certain section of slab on D, 37 that was the way we walked, and that was, I'm saying, 38 towards the end of July. It's a guess. I mean, it's about 39 July-ish, in that time. 40 41 Q. I want you to assume my instructions are he wasn't 42 even employed until 29 July 2013 and that any visit of 43 Mr Hanford was necessarily after that date, do you accept 44 that? 45 A. It could have been that. I'd accept that, that's 46 fine. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 795 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 Q. You make reference to, "He had 'Fear' tattooed on his 2 knuckles." Did you notice "Love" - L-O-V-E - was on the 3 other? 4 A. No, I didn't. It was only because I couldn't remember 5 his name, and I remembered that was on his knuckles. 6 That's about all I remembered for Mr Hanford. 7 8 Q. I will show you Mr Hanford's second statement. I take 9 you to the back page. You might recall my 10 cross-examination of Mr Hook about your business card? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. Tell me when you've got the page with the big "B" on 14 the top right-hand corner? 15 A. Yes, that's my business card. 16 17 Q. Do you accept this deals with a visit sometime in 18 August 2013? 19 A. It could have. 20 21 Q. Can you remember whether you personally handed a copy 22 of your business card to Mr Hanford? 23 A. No, I can't. I can't remember if I gave him one. 24 I think I might have given Luke Poskus one once, I'm not 25 sure, on the first meeting with him. 26 27 Q. Would you ever give your own site managers copies of 28 your cards in case they have to give them to people coming 29 on site, wanting to know who is the project manager? 30 A. No, but Dick's office is also often where we had 31 meetings, and if I had a card there, it would be easy 32 enough to pick up, I'm sure, so -- 33 34 Q. You're not suggesting you are the one who dealt with 35 Mr Hanford for the visit he sets out on this page -- 36 A. I think I walked with Mr Hanford, yes. 37 38 Q. I suggest to you he has never done a safety walk, 39 ever, at the Easty Street Project? 40 A. I remember a walk with who I thought was Mr Hanford, 41 yes. 42 43 Q. I suggest when Counsel Assisting led him in 44 re-examination to suggest that it was paragraphs 7 or 8 of 45 Mr Hook's statement, that could never be correct because 46 Mr Hanford wasn't even employed before 29 July 2013? 47 A. All right, yes. I'm not solid on the dates, no.

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 796 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 Q. Have a look at Mr Hanford's second statement, 3 paragraph 8. 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. You're not solid on disputing where he says, second 7 sentence: 8 9 At no point in time, while I was employed 10 by the Union, did I perform or participate 11 in any safety walk or any safety inspection 12 at the Easty Street site. 13 14 A. I believe a walk. I'm not saying he was aggressive. 15 He was unfriendly, the guy I thought we're talking about, 16 and we definitely went for a walk. It went for about an 17 hour. We went on that slab and we had an argument over a 18 handrail, I remember that, so -- 19 20 Q. Might I suggest, with the passage of time, you are 21 entirely mistaken because any discussion of that type took 22 place on 3 July 2013, some 26 days before Mr Hanford was 23 even employed? 24 A. No. I certainly remember going for a walk. 25 26 Q. And it was with Mr Poskus, wasn't it, not Mr Hanford? 27 A. No, I don't believe it was with Mr Poskus. I didn't 28 go on that walk. 29 30 Q. You have listened to the evidence and read the 31 statements, you understand Mr Poskus says he did attend the 32 Easty Street site on 3 July 2013? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. Have a look at his larger statement. It will probably 36 have a yellow Post-It note on it to further assist 37 identifying it. Could you go to that statement, page 3, 38 paragraph 14? 39 A. That's the one with the yellow tag? The one with 40 "Electrical Practices" on it? 41 42 Q. I am going to go to page 3, paragraph 14, and then 43 I'll come to the tag. I was just identifying it had a tag 44 to help you go to the correct statement. 45 A. All right. Yes. 46 47 Q. It is correct, isn't it, looking at the first two

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 797 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 lines of paragraph 14, that the site had a sign to the 2 effect "All visitors must report to the site office"? 3 A. Yes, they would definitely have that sign. 4 5 Q. And you're not in a position to dispute that Mr Poskus 6 went and talked to Dick Hook? 7 A. No. I actually remember him talking to Dick and going 8 for a walk with Micah. 9 10 Q. Did you attend on that walk? 11 A. No, I didn't. 12 13 Q. Were you made aware that the CEPU official was 14 attending because of suspicions there were safety breaches 15 that included people walking in front of moving plant? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. Might that have been made clear to Mr Hook and it 19 wasn't raised with you? 20 A. Maybe. I can't -- 21 22 Q. And if you can't comment - I'm going to -- 23 A. I can't comment. 24 25 Q. -- go through two other matters -- 26 A. I can't comment. I wasn't part of it. 27 28 Q. You can't dispute that the CEPU official attended due 29 to suspicions that there had been safety breaches 30 concerning falling from heights on the site as at 3 July 31 2013? 32 A. No, I can't confirm or deny. 33 34 Q. And you can't confirm or deny that he attended that 35 day with suspicions about there were problems with ingress 36 and egress to the site? 37 A. No, I can't confirm. 38 39 Q. I want to then take you to that Post-It note on 40 Mr Poskus's statement, and can you assume it's called 41 "LP-2". It is the annexure headed "Facts Sheet - 42 Electrical Practices - Construction and Demolition Sites". 43 Do you have the page in front of you? 44 A. Yes, I've got that. Yes. 45 46 Q. Do you in your position, either now or previously, 47 have any working knowledge of "Australian Standard

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 798 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 3012:2010. Electrical installations - Construction and 2 demolition sites"? 3 A. No, I don't. 4 5 Q. Do you know anything about there's been harmonised 6 health and safety laws introduced into some States and 7 Territories of this country? 8 A. No, not really, no. 9 10 Q. Do you know anything about, if you go to the next 11 page, "Switchboard Construction", the third dot point: 12 13 Energised (live) parts must be effectively 14 protected at all times against contact by 15 workers. 16 17 A. No, I don't have, but that's -- 18 19 Q. Is that something you would rely upon your safety 20 officer? 21 A. Yes, definitely, and my electrician to make sure what 22 he's -- 23 24 Q. Accepting you have others you rely on, would you 25 accept if one could observe holes which permitted a worker 26 to get access to the energised part of the power board, 27 that screams out to be dealt with then and there as a 28 safety issue, doesn't it? 29 A. And I believe it was. Yes, I believe it was. 30 31 Q. You do know that was raised by Mr Poskus during this 32 visit, do you? 33 A. Oh, only through what I've heard in the last two days. 34 35 Q. But before then, do you say you had no knowledge? 36 A. No, I was told there was - they went for a walk, they 37 had fixed up a couple of items and there was no issues. No 38 issues is what I remember. 39 40 Q. I was going to come to that. You said that also in 41 paragraph 6, at the end, didn't you, "No issues were 42 found"? 43 A. Yes. That's -- 44 45 Q. Can I suggest to you you're mistaken, or there is 46 another alternative, you can tell me which one it is, you 47 were not informed about the need to fix the holes which

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 799 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 permitted access to live energised parts? 2 A. No. If it's fixed there's no issues. I mean, I'm not 3 talking about - you know, at the end of the day it was 4 done. There is no - nothing to do. 5 6 Q. Do you mean matters might have been identified, but 7 because they got addressed that means there were no issues? 8 A. Yes. That's the way I've used it, yes. 9 10 Q. That's the sense in which both in your oral evidence 11 and written statement, you use the expression "No issues 12 were found"? 13 A. That's right. 14 15 Q. As you understand it, the visit by the CEPU official, 16 Mr Poskus, was amicable, matters were discussed and they 17 were resolved to the satisfaction of the CEPU official and 18 your managers? 19 A. Yes, I didn't think there was a whole lot - I wasn't 20 told there was a whole lot of issues out of that meeting. 21 I had a meeting with him prior to that which was friendly 22 enough and he just asked who the plumber was. 23 24 Q. Can I suggest you are mistaken because he'd only done 25 one safety walk, ever, at Easty Street? 26 A. Oh, well, I hope I got the right - I definitely met - 27 anyway. If I'm mistaken - I thought I'd met a plumbing guy 28 before that who asked me just to - it was a friendly 29 meeting, just asked who the plumber was. It could have 30 been a different guy. 31 32 Q. I'll see if this assists: as you have been in and 33 about the hearing room waiting to be called, have you seen 34 a gentleman who has been identified to you as Damian 35 Kirkwood? 36 A. No. 37 38 Q. So it might be that the first reference you make in 39 paragraph 5, you're mistaken, it's not Luke Poskus, but 40 it's another CEPU official? 41 42 MR CHIN: I object. 43 44 THE WITNESS: Or whatever. 45 46 MR CHIN: The questioning is proceeding on a false 47 premise. Mr Davey's evidence is that there was a safety

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 800 A C DAVEY (Mr Docking) Transcript produced by DTI 1 walk with Mr Poskus on a previous occasion. Mr Davey's 2 evidence in paragraph 5 is that he simply met with 3 Mr Poskus. 4 5 THE WITNESS: That's right. We didn't walk on site, yes. 6 7 MR DOCKING: Q. I appreciate that clarification. It 8 might assist, but was this when it was pretty much no more 9 than a hole in the ground? 10 A. I'm not sure. I don't recall. 11 12 Q. It may have been a Mr Damian Kirkwood who was then 13 employed by the CEPU? 14 A. It may have been, yes. I don't know. 15 16 MR DOCKING: Thank you, Commissioner. 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thank you, Mr Docking. 19 Mr Morison? 20 21 MR MORISON: No, thank you, Commissioner. 22 23 MR CHIN: Just briefly, Commissioner, if I may? 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 26 27

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 801 A C DAVEY (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 with until it had been safely lit. What is your response 2 to that? 3 A. There's no memory. I'd say it's wrong. I don't 4 remember it. I just say it's wrong. I believe nothing 5 came out of that walk. 6 7 MR CHIN: Thank you. Nothing further, Mr Commissioner. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Chin. Mr Scruby? 10 11 MR SCRUBY: No questions. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Does anyone object to Mr Davey being 14 excused from further attendance? 15 16 Mr Davey, you are excused from further attendance on 17 the summons that you have responded to. Thanks very much 18 for giving up the last two days for this hearing. 19 20 Yes, Mr Docking? 21 22 MR DOCKING: Commissioner, there is a matter that greatly 23 concerns my clients, particularly the CEPU plumbers. Their 24 brand, if you like, and reputation is being unnecessarily 25 damaged. There has been a whole lot of press, such as 26 things like "bringing the Bulldog to flex muscles on work 27 sites." 28 29 Day one of the transcript has a mistake, page 631, 30 line 35, and might I immediately emphasise, I do not 31 criticise the transcription people. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: The transcription people, in five 34 decades of experience of transcription people, the present 35 transcription people are the best I have ever encountered. 36 I am just looking for that page. Did you say 37 page 531? 38 39 MR DOCKING: Page 631, line 35, and I want to make that 40 clear, I'm not criticising them, mistakes happen. 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: They are beyond criticism. You can 43 leave the witness box, Mr Davey. 44 45 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 46 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 802 A C DAVEY (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 2 THE COMMISSIONER: I've got page 631. Line? 3 4 MR DOCKING: Line 35, I'm told. The transcript reads 5 "Canberra Rugby Bulldogs" I'm sorry, Canberra. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: I am getting weary. Let's start at the 8 beginning again. The page is? 9 10 MR AGIUS: Page 631, line 35. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, but that doesn't say anything 13 about Canberra. 14 15 MR DOCKING: Canberra Rugby Bulldogs. It was Canterbury 16 Bulldogs. 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Page 631, line 35, in whole, reads: 19 20 continuing. He will not be long, I don't 21 think. 22 23 MR DOCKING: The transcript that we have had access to 24 does have it as transcript page 631. 25 26 The point is that there's a reference to "Canberra 27 Rugby Bulldogs". It was "Canterbury Bulldogs". 28 29 There has been much press about my client sending the 30 Bulldog to intimidate a builder. It has been taken 31 entirely out of context in the press, because the 32 Assistant Secretary is a mad Canterbury Rugby League 33 Bulldog supporter, thus his nickname as "Bulldog". 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: That is the way I understood the 36 evidence, and it corresponds with my recollection of having 37 read this transcript in the last 24 hours or so. 38 39 But just putting those things on one side, the powers 40 of a Royal Commission are extraordinarily limited. They 41 certainly don't extend to dealing with the press. 42 43 MR DOCKING: I accept the Royal Commission and 44 Counsel Assisting cannot control the press, but there has 45 now been that reputational brand and damage without it 46 being put in the proper context. 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 803 A C DAVEY (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI 1 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, can we take it that you have put 2 it in the proper context? 3 4 MR DOCKING: I provided Mr Stoljar with the Canterbury 5 Football Club membership of Theo, the Assistant Secretary, 6 and hopefully the record will become balanced and the press 7 might become balanced about it. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: My only point is since these remarks 10 you have been making to me have been made, may we take it 11 that the press now have in their possession the materials 12 to proceed, as you would desire them to in future? 13 14 MR DOCKING: I hope so, Commissioner. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar. 17 18 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, there were two other witnesses 19 who were listed for today, Mr and Mrs Lo Re. They have 20 very kindly indicated that they are able to be here 21 tomorrow morning, if that is more convenient to the 22 Commission. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Do you want to start early 25 tomorrow? 26 27 MR STOLJAR: Yes, we could do, Commissioner, 9.30. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: I was thinking of lower digits than 30 that, but 9.30. Anything else? 31 32 MR STOLJAR: No. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Chin? 35 36 MR CHIN: Mr Commissioner, may I be excused from the 37 proceedings, subject to the return of Mr Dennis Milin for 38 the completion of his evidence? 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thank you very much for your 41 assistance in the last couple of days, Mr Chin. The 42 hearing will resume at 9.30am tomorrow. 43 44 AT 4.35PM THE COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED TO THURSDAY, 23 JULY 45 2015 AT 9.30AM 46 47

.22/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 804 A C DAVEY (Mr Chin) Transcript produced by DTI