Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4696 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

Together with a Mr Dan Kolomanski, these promoters of VITAB were described in the following terms by the board of inquiry:

... the deception as to the actual promoters in VITAB Limited was brought about by the belief that some of their number at least would not pass probity tests, and the whole arrangement might therefore be jeopardised. I find also that the purpose or purposes for which that arrangement [was] sought had nothing to do with tapping into some allegedly rich Asian betting market for the benefit of Australian coffers, and everything to do with taking advantage of the favorable tax arrangements in Vanuatu. Such an arrangement would never have been entered into by ACTTAB had it been disclosed, whether by reason of its illegality or simply as a matter of public policy. The deception continued through the period when the litigation was settled. Settlement would not have taken place had the deception been exposed. That deception continued until exposed by the present Inquiry. Both the contract and the settlement having been procured by fraud, the sum paid is recoverable from those participants guilty of that fraud, both jointly and severally.

Mr Speaker, on the basis of the evidence obtained by Mr Burbidge, the only conclusion one can draw is to say that ACTTAB, with Mr Berry's approval, entered into a business deal with a firm which was, to all intents and purposes, a front for a major SP bookmaking operation. Indeed, documents obtained by the Victorian police and cited by the board of inquiry show that two accounts for VITAB existed on the books of the Numbawan Betting Shop, which could well have been in existence in 1993 or 1994.

I turn now to some of the other key findings by Mr Burbidge about the conduct of a number of senior ACTTAB staff, the former ACTTAB board, and the previous administration generally. The inquiry finds that no probity checks were ever undertaken by ACTTAB prior to the signing of the VITAB agreement, nor was ACTTAB ever informed of the result of checks thought to have been or to be undertaken by the ACT Government. Such checking as had been done was, to quote the report, "incomplete, inadequate and unsatisfactory". On the basis of information presented to Mr Burbidge, he found that Messrs McMahon, Bartholomew and Tripp - three of the key players in the VITAB operation - would not have satisfied probity requirements had they been subjected to thorough character or police checks.

Mr Speaker, the roles played by Mr Philip Neck - the former chief executive officer of ACTTAB - and two other senior ACTTAB staff, as well as the actions of the former board, were all criticised by the board of inquiry. Among his findings were the following: Mr Neck overlooked the failure of Mr Kolomanski to provide necessary information, failed to undertake basic checks, concealed or glossed over matters unfavourable to the venture and provided Mr Kolomanski with information as to the ACT's and ACTTAB's position which ought properly to have been kept confidential. Mr Neck saw his task as protecting the agreement with VITAB at all costs. Either Mr Neck was so enthusiastic about the venture that he was prepared to disregard those steps which prudence demanded in developing the contract or he was astonishingly inept.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .