This sounds like sour grapes that the ABCC hasn't been abolished to allow the unions to run rampant again.

If John has anything other than inuendo he should pass it on to the ABCC to investigate. This impotent whinging is devoid of reasoning.

Guess who this is a recording of, an iron ore price negotiator or unionised contruction workers operating in Australia?

’You’re f---ed. We know where you live. We are going to kill you and your family,’’ said one caller during the chase...Two chasing cars eventually cut in front of the Land Cruiser (with non-union workers) causing a collision, the statement says, bringing the traffic to a stop…

http://www.theage.com.au/national/brawling-bridge-unions-face-financial-ruin-20090812-eib3.html

No we don't need the ABCC, more like we need mobile SWAT teams to take care of these bastards. John's convoluted reasoning may have convinced himself that information gathering can be equated to physical violence and threats against innocents, but I reckon the rest of us can spot the difference. Also John you may wish to consider that Australia and China have substationally different views on what constitutes spying or bribery, apparently the information Hu was after was only what a normal open market might avail it's participants anyway, stock levels, usage stats and the like. Let's prosecute Australians who break Chinese laws in China, great idea, lets start with those nasty public gatherers shall we?

John it is because the ABCC was established ostensibly to monitor and reform 'lawlessness' in the building and construction unions.

There is the Workplace Ombudsman (now known as the Fair Work Ombudsman) to monitor employers.

Bribing foreign officials is a crime but it does not fall into under the jurisdiction of the ABCC but Home Affairs (AFP) and the Attorney-General's Department.

Get your underlying message but you aren't you coming at it from the wrong tack.