AWU Fraud new revelations



hedley_thomas.png


  • National Chief Correspondent
    Brisbane
  • 8 Oct 2017
  • Australian


7ca2adad0151acef304807b9fbb620e9.png

Notes of panicky, closed-door debriefings of Julia Gillard’s then lover and law firm client, disgraced union boss Bruce Wilson, set out his confessions 22 years ago to perpetrating a major fraud with a “slush fund” that she had set up for him.

 

The handwritten notes, leaked to The Weekend Australian and revealed publicly for the first time, show that Mr Wilson admitted his crimes to Bernard Murphy, now a Federal Court judge, in a tense meeting at Slater & Gordon in August 1995.

Publicly, in the years since and under oath at the trade union royal commission in 2014, Mr Wilson has repeatedly denied criminal wrongdoing.

 

He has avoided prosecution despite the commission’s recommending he be charged over one of the Australian Workers Union’s biggest frauds.

69f93babc94b76ea6014aca8062b04c5.jpg

Julia Gillard this year.

The slush fund scandal ended Mr Wilson’s prime ministerial ambitions in 1995, divided the AWU and caused a serious split at the law firm, resulting in Ms Gillard leaving as a salaried partner for a new career that took her into politics.

 

The notes show Mr Wilson told Ms Gillard’s manager and mentor at the law firm, Mr (later Justice) Murphy, that if the slush fund were “ever investigated”, he (Wilson) would “go to jail” with others over the misappropriation of more than $400,000.

 

Some of the conduct of the then AWU state secretary, once touted by union 

heavyweight Bill Ludwig as a future Labor leader, was written up by Mr Murphy at a tumultuous time in August and September 1995.


8 comments

 

The large amounts of money Mr Wilson’s slush fund had received were described as illegal “secret commissions”.

 

One note describes Mr Wilson admitting that $7000 from an AWU-branded account had been spent on “renovations”, but the property was not disclosed. Ms Gillard’s house had significant renovations that were funded by what her builder, Athol James, told the royal commission in 2014 were “wads of cash” that he saw being provided by Mr Wilson.

 

The damning Murphy notes were not produced or used against Mr Wilson and others at the royal commission because of legal professional privilege, which prohibits courts receiving confidential communications between a client and a lawyer.

 

Justice Murphy, whose 2011 appointment to the Federal Court was strongly backed by Ms Gillard as the then prime minister, also cited legal professional privilege when he declined to answer some questions at the commission about Mr Wilson’s role in the slush fund scandal.

 

The emergence now of the notes will raise questions about why Mr Wilson, who was found by the commission to be the ring-leader and architect of a large fraud, has not been prosecuted.

 

The notes were locked up at the law firm after the abrupt departure of Ms Gillard over the slush fund scandal in 1995 and Mr Murphy quit at about the same time and went to Maurice Blackburn over a separate controversy.

The notes and other material were taken in 2013 when Victoria Police fraud squad detectives executed a search warrant.

 

The documents have been obtained by The Weekend Australian as authorities in Western Australia prepare to prosecute Mr Wilson’s former AWU sidekick, Ralph Blewitt, who has admitted his role as a bagman in a scam he said was run by his then boss and good friend Mr Wilson.

 

In one of his notes, Mr Murphy says Mr Wilson “told me for first time of the (AWU) Workplace Reform Association account in WA”. The AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc is the entity set up by Ms Gillard for Mr Wilson and Mr Blewitt.

In a tape-recorded exit interview in 1995 shortly before she left the firm, Ms Gillard described the entity as a “slush fund” for union officials to fight elections. This purpose was not described in its objects, and the rest of the AWU did not know of its existence.

 

Some at Slater & Gordon, including equity partner Nick ­Styant-Browne, were furious the firm had been caught up in fraud with a slush fund they did not know Ms Gillard, who did not open a file, had set up for her client and boyfriend.

 

Ms Gillard has repeatedly denied knowing the fund was to be used in a fraud. The royal commission found that she had been a sloppy lawyer but had not committed offences, and was not aware of Mr Wilson’s conduct.

 

Royal commission head Dyson Heydon QC rejected Ms Gillard’s denials that she was the beneficiary of cash sums from Mr Wilson for house renovations. The commission found that the builder, Mr James, who recalled the “wads of cash”, and a union staffer, Wayne Hem, who said he had deposited $5000 at Mr Wilson’s request into her account, were telling the truth.

 

Mr Murphy wrote in his Aug­ust 1995 notes that Mr Wilson disclosed that “the monies from the account had been misspent on a (number) of things he did not want to tell us about”.

 

Mr Wilson confessed that hundreds of thousands of dollars were received from companies and funnelled through the slush fund accounts while being kept secret from all other officials of the AWU — which was also a client of Slater & Gordon.

 

The $7000 renovation cost referenced in one of Mr Murphy’s notes matches the sum Mr Blewitt told the commission he had handed over at Ms Gillard’s house.

The notes set out summaries of tense talks with Mr Wilson, culminating in his being sacked as a client and Ms Gillard leaving her job because of the grave concerns of some at the firm.

 

Justice Murphy told the commission that at the time and among some equity partners of the firm, “the concern that was conveyed was that Julia Gillard had created an association which might have been set up corruptly and might have involved corrupt monies and it involved the firm in a conveyance involving those monies”.

 

 

The notes state that after Mr Wilson had confessed his role in the fraud, Mr Murphy agreed with a barrister, Robert Hinkley, “that I (would) contact John Cain from (Maurice Blackburn) on behalf of Wilson to negotiate a redundancy package + resignation for Wilson in the hope that if he left (the AWU) there (would) be no

John Cain Jr is Victoria’s Solicitor for Public Prosecutions but in 1995 he was acting for union officials opposed to Mr Wilson and unaware of the extent of his fraud.

Mr Murphy says in a note: “Very concerned. Told him (Wilson) that glad he had made his decision to resign already (because) this issue (would) affect my (the word is unintelligible).”

 

Mr Murphy told Mr Wilson that despite the criminality and the firm also acting for the AWU, the firm would not tell anyone of his admissions of fraud.

 

A handwritten note shows Mr Murphy wrote at 1.10pm on Aug­ust 14, 1995: “Advised unable to act on his behalf (because) not prepared to be party to misleading union re (AWU Workplace Reform Association) monies.”

 

Describing Mr Wilson’s response, Mr Murphy wrote: “Very worried. Thought this meant we (would) tell. Advise him that (could) not tell anyone. Completely prohibited. Legal Prof. Priv. Different thing (though) to sit idly by or co-operate with it by acting for him.

 

“Furthermore, he had lied to us about (Workplace Reform Association). He had instructed us to set it up. He had then received monies into it improperly. Then he had spent the monies improperly. Lied to us and involved us in criminal wrongdoing, re the house. Partners very angry about that. (Could) not act for him. (Would) give him a letter that day which set this out. He concerned re letter being posted or even couriered. I said I (would) hand-­deliver it.”

 

The August 14 letter to Mr Wilson, headed “possible criminal prosecution” and written by Mr Murphy as head of the firm’s industrial unit, says: “Your recent provision of information regarding the AWU Workplace Reform Association Bank Account and misappropriations from it has rendered it impossible for us to continue to act on your behalf.”

 

Mr Murphy wrote it would be unethical of the firm to continue, and the rules of professional privilege “are such that we cannot ­disclose the misappropriation with­out your consent”.

 

Despite the fraud, “we considered that negotiating a redundancy payment on your behalf … was proper”.

 

He also referred to “false instructions” from Mr Wilson and Mr Blewitt about a house at Kerr Street, Fitzroy, bought in Mr Blew­itt’s name by Mr Wilson with slush fund money at an auction attended by Ms Gillard. The law firm handled the conveyancing.

The AWU’s then national secretary, Ian Cambridge, now a Fair Work commissioner, discovered the slush fund bank accounts in 1996 and learnt of the house after it had been sold in 1996, when it was too late to claw money back.

 

Internal documents show the firm wrote off money it was owed by Mr Wilson and elected not to bill him for its fees after his confession, as any money he paid would be “poss(ibly) tainted”.

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on email

To think Gillard Shorten Roxon ended up running the country .

All slithery lawyers 

This one is a slow burner .. It will show Shorten for the thug he is .

Affairs)Sydney@chriskkenny

You would be forgiven for thinking that political leaders in western liberal democracies had somehow lost their fundamental grasp of how democracy is supposed to work.

 

Rather than accept the principle that a governing class is put in place at the behest of the people and dispensed with by voters depending on its performance, they seem to think the governing class has been let down by the hoi polloi.

Julia Gillard accidentally brought all this clearly into focus again yesterday in her Bob Hawke lecture. Her intention was to talk about anxiety and stresses in modern society but her appropriation of political turmoil to demonstrate her point only served to reveal her own disconnect from reality.

She is not alone. Her misdiagnosis is rampant around the world with vast swathes of politicians, journalists, academics and others in the media/political class — mainly but not exclusively of the Left — who have been shocked by Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump.

Instead of comprehending how the political class has been brought to heel by mainstream voters, they patronisingly explain how those poor little people have got it all wrong.

“Certainly, events like Brexit and the election of Trump show there is a backlash, those hit and hurt by change want to lash out,” Ms Gillard said. “Think of the circumstances of unskilled or semi-skilled Western white men. Challenged by economic change, the gender revolution and the migration of people, culture and ideas, every reality they thought they could rely on has given way beneath them. Anxiety is an understandable response.”

AFP called in to search for "receipts" pertaining to $100,000 donation to Labour Re-election Funds  . mmm but  no whiff of any AFP investigation of Liberals generous $30 Million "Gift" to it's all time friend and benfactor good ole "Rubert Murdoch" ... for his failing Foxtel Empire or his "Rupert Murdoch's" interference in the re-thinking of Labour's fibre to the premises NBN plan .. mmmm would that have spelt a quicker end to the failing Foxtel enterprise ... What do we have now .. a hybrid system the joke of the technologically advanced countries of the world ..

 

Bravo .. Bravo .. somthing to be truly proud of .. Australians are such and apathetic lot really ..

Just another case of an incompetant govrernment, they pulled the pin out of a grenade, forgot to throw it and ended up blowing theselves up.  Has no one caught on to the fact that the documents sought in the latest fiasco may not exist as they only had to kept for seven years before they could be legitimatley destroyed.  The other point is that the governmnet invetigators have never asked for the documents involved to be produced, the request was made by someone in the media, someone who has no right to ask for anything.

The opposition does not need to do anything all it needs to do is sit back and watch the government destroy itself.

exPS unions have a track record for destroying documents and covering their tracks. People dont like unions any more. :(

Every organisation in the world, including government departments destroy documents, it is called maintaining the records.  As I said, it is quite normal for most records to be destroyed after seven years, why should a Union be any different to the government?

Most peopl don't like paying for insurence, but they do, because it is to their benifit in the long run.  :}

Wether the union legimaly destroyed the documents or not it does not make their actions any better . 

It was a misuse of members funds . 

I am wholeheartedly in favour of this...discussed on 7.30 Report last night.

The immediate establishment of a federal anti-corruption agency to oversee everything.

Full transcript below...well worth a read.

LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: Serious corruption at a federal level almost certainly exists, but it's not being exposed according to a group of prominent former judges.

They're calling for the immediate establishment of a federal anti-corruption agency.

It would have the same powers as state anti-corruption bodies as Matt Peacock reports.

MATT PEACOCK, REPORTER: It's corruption right at the top.

NEWS READER: The Reserve Bank of Australia ensnared in an international bribery scandal.

MATT PEACOCK: And it's at the national level where the big money changes hands.

NEWS READER: It was Australia's most explosive corruption saga - hundreds of millions of dollars in kickbacks disguised as transport fees, paid by wheat marketeer AWB Limited to the regime of Saddam Hussein.

MATT PEACOCK: In most states, anti-corruption agencies with sweeping powers have been operating for decades.

In New South Wales, the Independent Commission Against Corruption has even brought down a premier.

But it's a different story nationally, where there's no body specifically charged with targeting corruption.

STEPHEN CHARLES QC, FMR VICTORIAN SUPREME COURT JUDGE: I have no doubt at all that there is abundant corruption in Canberra.

It's already well-known that there is abundant corruption in the other capital cities of Australia. Why on earth does the air suddenly clear around Queanbeyan?

MATT PEACOCK: Now, a group of former judges believes enough is enough.

ANTHONY WHEALY: We are all committed to the establishment of a national integrity body.

MATT PEACOCK: Anthony Whealey is a former New South Wales Supreme Court judge, now heading the anti-corruption body Transparency International and he's working with a committee of other former judges - all of whom believe the time for a national anti-corruption agency has come.

ANTHONY WHEALY: I call it the National Integrity Commission. It would be an umbrella-style body that would have its spokes, if you like, protruding over and above the Federal Police, over and above ACLEI (Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity), over and above the Parliamentary Expenses Authority, over and above the Australian Electoral Commission, and over and above the public service.

And that one body would function by focusing its attention wherever a complaint was made and it would do its best to expose and educate and, where necessary, refer matters for prosecution if criminality was revealed. One body.

Clearly, momentum is building for some kind of agency...

MATT PEACOCK: The progressive think tank, the Australia Institute, organised this meeting after its polling suggested most Australians support a national body - a sentiment shared by Nick Xenophon Party's Senator, Skye Kakoschke-Moore.

SKYE KAKOSCHKE-MOORE, NICK XENOPHON PARTY: Well, sadly, faith in politicians is at an all-time low. There are reports that have come out from various global agencies that say that in Australia, the majority of people think that politicians are engaged in some form of corruption, and about 12 per cent of people think that, if not all politicians are, some would be.

MATT PEACOCK: Kakoschke-Moore sat on a Senate inquiry that reported earlier this year where, nonetheless, the major parties fell short of directly recommending a federal ICAC.

SENATOR JACINTA COLLINS, COMMITTEE CHAIR, LABOR: It's a complex area and, if we simply had come forward with a recommendation without following it with "... and the model should work this way," responding to the work of the assessment that's currently being conducted, I just don't think we would be getting it right.

MATT PEACOCK: Federal Government agencies such as the Federal Police, the Federal Ombudsman and the Crime Commission already do some of the work but former prominent judges argue they're not enough.

MARGARET MCMURDO, FMR PRESIDENT, QLD COURT OF APPEAL: They just don't have the powers that an ICAC-type body has and nor do they have the ability to hold public hearings, and nor do they have an educative role, which is a very important part of a national integrity commission - to educate public servants, to educate new politicians, to educate police on the sort of conduct that is, and is not, acceptable to the public.

REPORTER (Question to Eddie Obeid): Is it fair to say you owe the people of New South Wales an apology, and possibly quite a lot of money?

MATT PEACOCK: Despite some spectacular successes, the New South Wales ICAC has also drawn criticism for trashing reputations and overriding civil rights.

Any federal equivalent would need better safeguards, argues Sydney lawyer Mark Robinson.

MARK ROBINSON, SC: You turn up, you're often given two hours' notice, you're put in a taxi with a subpoena, and you give your evidence.

You're forced to incriminate yourself sometimes, and you do so and you have no recourse against a finding, except what's available in the courts and judicial review and that's far from perfect.

So what really is needed is a body to oversee the fact-finding functions of a federal ICAC and that federal body will simply oversee the work of the ICAC and ensure that it's fair and legally correct.

STEPHEN CHARLES: I understand the civil libertarian objections to these things. They are entirely justifiable, and we have to be very careful setting up these bodies that there are proper limitations and oversight of the bodies and their work.

MATT PEACOCK: The big question is whether our politicians are, themselves, prepared to risk scrutiny of their own actions.

MARGARET MCMURDO: In many ways, it's a protection to politicians to have a body like this, because it means that the public will have confidence that there is oversight of their politicians and there is accountability.

And if there is corruption, it will be exposed.

MARK ROBINSON: It has to include politicians, members of parliament, senior public servants - everybody.

There should be no exemptions whatsoever.

If there are exemptions, then that'll raise a red flag, and that'll allow a hotbed of corruption to flourish without ever being investigated.

MATT PEACOCK: And there's no time like the present, according to these senior legal figures who will soon be submitting their blueprint to federal politicians.

STEPHEN CHARLES: We have to prove to the politicians in Canberra that it's necessary and it's going to be difficult to do that.

But they are going to have forced upon them the fact that they are not trusted by the community and by the vast majority of the community.

MARK ROBINSON: Now is the time to put up a brave proposal and expose all parliamentarians to investigations for corruption and if there's corruption, it'll be rooted out. What's wrong with that?

The two instances you quote of the reserve bank and the wheat board . 

Invoveled commercial transactions of exporting our wheat and selling our technology of printing non paper currency . 

Both succesful in increasing Australia’s wealth .

if you have ever done Business in some third world counties as I have you will find it is necessary cost to pay local agents if you do t you don’t do business . 

Govt should not be involved in business but leave it to experts . 

So ... by your logic "Brocky" whoever you are .... as long as it makes that "magic" item "money" .. corruption by any Australian agency .. it's  aok... .. God no wonder we are becoming more and more like "America"    .. a nation of "Ausmericans" ... I'm alright Jack .. F**K You...

 

No longer can I give you a hand ... Mate !!!

8 comments



To make a comment, please register or login

Preview your comment