Fugitive property developer Jean Nassif will not give evidence before an anti-corruption inquiry on Friday after providing a \u201cmedical certificate\u201d.<\/p>\n
It came as the brother of former premier Dominic Perrottet was grilled over messages claiming he told Mr Nassiff how he could get an MP opposed to his projects \u201con his knees\u201d.<\/p>\n
The NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption is probing allegations Mr Nassif, a prohibited donor, gave money to a conservative and Christian faction within the NSW Liberal Party known as the Reformers to damage the reputation of then-MP David Elliott and former building commissioner David Chandler. <\/p>\n
The probe previously heard allegations the Reformers received funds \u2013 including from another prohibited donor, hotelier Michael O\u2019Hara, and from Catholic Schools NSW former chief executive Dallas McInerney \u2013 to bolster conservative ranks and take over the party writ large through branch stacking.<\/p>\n
Mr Nassif had been due to give evidence before the Commission on Friday via video link, having fled to Lebanon in 2022.<\/p>\n
However, counsel assisting Peggy Dwyer revealed at the end of evidence on Tuesday afternoon that Mr Nassif had \u201cprovided the Commission with a medical certificate\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cHis appearance has now been rescheduled for later in the public inquiry. <\/p>\n
\u201cAn announcement as to when will be made in due course after following up.\u201d<\/p>\n
The postponement comes less than a week after ICAC had announced Mr Nassif would appear<\/p>\n
Mr Nassif left for Lebanon in 2022 following multiple scandals, with NSW Police since issuing a warrant for his arrest over allegations of fraud. <\/p>\n
His daughter Ashlyn Nassif earlier this year pleaded guilty to falsifying documents in relation to one of Mr Nassif\u2019s developments. <\/p>\n
Ms Dwyer also told the Commission Mr Perrottet\u2019s brother Charles Perrottet would return to the witness box on Thursday despite planning on returning to Melbourne. <\/p>\n
\u2018On his knees\u2019<\/p>\n
On Monday, Mr Perrottet \u2013 who is named in the probe alongside brother Jean-Claude Perrottet \u2013 was grilled by Ms Dwyer over differing explanations he had offered ICAC over messages to Mr Nassif, who fled to Lebanon in 2022. Dominic Perrottet is not named in the probe and is not accused of any wrongdoing. <\/p>\n
Returning to the witness box on Tuesday morning, Charles Perrottet gave evidence that \u201cone way in which you secured money from Jean for your friends\u201d Reformers Christian Ellis and Jeremy Greenwood \u201cwas to suggest to him that you could achieve political outcomes\u201d, Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think that\u2019s going a bit too far,\u201d Charles Perrottet replied.<\/p>\n
\u201cI would suggest that I gave him updates and (would) suggest things\u201d, adding later the updates were on things \u201cthat I knew he (Mr Nassif) would be interested in\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m not going too far, Mr Perrottet. I\u2019m repeating your words to you from before morning tea,\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou knew that one reason they wanted to get you to these meetings was so that Jean Nassif could see that this powerful political broker for the Liberal Party was at the meetings.\u201d<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied \u201cThat would be a question for Jeremy (Greenwood).\u201d<\/p>\n
Mr Perrottet was also grilled over a May 2021 dinner with Mr Nassif at Nobu in Melbourne. <\/p>\n
In a subsequent message, he told an employee of Mr Nassif\u2019s Toplace, Labor Strathfield councillor Sharangan Maheswaran \u2013 who is named in ICAC probe \u2013 that he \u201ctold Jean that the best way to get the Building Commissioner off his back is to take the fight to (David) Elliot and dismantle his infrastructure\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we can get 189 and Garth Oon payments,\u201d he continued, referring to Toplace developments, \u201cwe can take Para(matta), Hills, Cumberland councils and the seat of Castle Hill.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cHe (Mr Elliot) will be completely isolated \u2026 he\u2019ll be on his knees,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Mr Perrottet repeatedly claimed that he \u201clied\u201d to Mr Nassif. <\/p>\n
Asked about what he had told him at the Nobu dinner about \u201cgetting rid\u201d of Mr Chandler, he told the Commission: \u201cI may have humoured him.\u201d<\/p>\n
Later, Ms Dwyer put to Mr Perrottet: \u201cThat when you spoke to Jean Nassif, you were telling him about political outcomes that you were trying to achieve for him and for yourself?\u201d <\/p>\n
Mr Perrotter replied: \u201cNo, not for him.\u201d<\/p>\n
However, Mr Perrottet denied knowledge of $150,000 from Mr Nassif to Beckington when shown messages which Ms Dwyer claimed was him \u201cthanking (Mr Nassif) for his financial support\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cHow does that fit with the evidence you just gave 10 minutes ago where you said that you would tell Jean Nassif some fibs about political outcomes you could achieve for him, so that you could get the money from Beckington?\u201d Ms Dwyer asked.<\/p>\n
Mr Perrottet replied: \u201cI don\u2019t understand how the two are related.\u201d<\/p>\n
The line of questioning prompted a sharp rebuke from Ms Dwyer. <\/p>\n
\u201cMr Perrottet, I am gobsmacked genuinely by your obfuscation around this,\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou had literally given evidence 10, 15 minutes ago that you told Jean Nassif lies to get him to pay money to Beckington.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Commission was then shown a call between Jean-Claude Perrottet and Mr Nassif in which the fugitive developer talked of giving \u201cyour brother (Charles Perrottet) another $100,000\u201d for preselection, or to Jeremy Greenwood, or Christian Ellis.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe would have seen Beckington as engaged to undertake advocacy on their behalf for his projects, and I\u2019ve been humouring about the political assistance to getting him paid,\u201d Mr Perrottet said.<\/p>\n
\u2018Civil war\u2019<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet was later shown a message from himself to his brother Jean-Claude and Mr Ellis in which he outlined a strategy for preselection in the electorate of Mitchell that included to \u201cfreeze the Baulkham Hills branch in perpetuity\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Reformers were a key part of your strategy to dismantle the centre Right political infrastructure in The Hills?\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
In response, Charles Perrottet said it was \u201cfair and reasonable\u201d to freeze the branch because of an investigation into allegations of impropriety, including that \u201cif they hadn\u2019t fraudulently changed the minutes, the branch would have been a Right branch\u201d. <\/p>\n
Ms Dwyer went on to tell the commission Mr Nassif wanted to see The Hills \u201ctaken over by the Right\u201d.<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet claimed Mr Nassif \u201cwould not sign the statutory declaration on the Mitchell Club unless he was confident that the Right were in the ascendancy\u201d.<\/p>\n
Ms Dwyer shot back: \u201cMr Perrottet, you haven\u2019t got a scrap of evidence to suggest that there was any statutory declaration that was in draft or being planned.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou haven\u2019t got a scrap of evidence for any of the allegations that you say he was making at that time.\u201d<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied: \u201cNo, he didn\u2019t sign a stat dec.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Mitchell Club, a Liberal Party fundraising body in Alex Hawke\u2019s federal electorate of Mitchell, which takes in The Hills, was allegedly \u201cgoing around\u201d donation laws, the commission was previously told.<\/p>\n
The commission was told on Monday Mr Perrottet had allegedly sought a statutory declaration from Mr Nassif in order to \u201cexpose this scheme (the Mitchell Club) of going around electoral funding laws by getting money from property developers for political outcomes\u201d.<\/p>\n
Later, Charles Perrottet claimed there was \u201ceffectively a civil war in the community\u201d between the Right and the centre Right factions in The Hills. <\/p>\n
He was shown a WhatsApp group he created \u2013 but did not recall creating \u2013 called \u201cBack to Basics\u201d, which included his brothers, Dominic and Jean-Claude, current upper house MLC Damien Tudehope, Christian Ellis, and others. <\/p>\n
\u201cEveryone in that group were key supporters of the Right faction,\u201d Ms Dwyer said. <\/p>\n
However, Charles Perrottet said he could not recall whether it was established to \u201cget together to see what could be done in respect to recruitment models\u201d and instead suggested it was motivated, in part, to support a single person.<\/p>\n
In one message to the group, it was stated: \u201c \u2026 although between us, at times, we\u2019ve had our differences, I\u2019m sure we can put them to one side to try and protect and advance our common interests.\u201d<\/p>\n
Wife\u2019s $15,000 fee<\/p>\n
Earlier, Mr Perrottet was grilled over an email sent by himself in regard to his wife Anita Perrottet\u2019s \u201cmonthly fee of $10,000\u201d to be paid to her company Macquarie Consulting from Beckington, a consulting group founded by Reformer Christian Ellis and associate Robert Assaf.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe subsequent invoice, after getting that text message from Christian (Ellis), sent by you on July 27, 2021, had her monthly invoice at $15,000,\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo, it was $5000 a month, in effect, to reflect the amount you were worth?\u201d<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied: \u201cI\u2019m not sure. That\u2019s just the way it was structured.\u201d<\/p>\n
He later admitted to \u201csome sort of conversation\u201d about the increase in the monthly invoice.<\/p>\n
In her own evidence, Ms Perrottet said she thought the money was \u201cgenuinely owed\u201d for a \u201cfull year\u2019s work\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo, did your wife then lie to the commission last week about the amount that was in fact covering your advice?\u201d Ms Dwyer asked.<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet shot back: \u201cNo, as I said to you, I\u2019m not sure how much I disclosed to Anita.\u201d<\/p>\n
Later, Ms Dwyer asked: \u201cDid you deliberately hide it from your wife?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI wouldn\u2019t say deliberately hide it,\u201d Charles Perrottet replied.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut, I wanted her to \u2026 feel valued.<\/p>\n
\u201cShe was doing a lot of good work for Jeremy (Greenwood).\u201d<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet said Mr Ellis would \u201cinform Anita and I\u201d about how to structure invoices.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe conversation I had was with Jeremy in regards to the advice I gave. I\u2019m not sure what conversations Jeremy and Christian had.\u201d<\/p>\n
In response, Ms Dwyer told Charles Perrottet, \u201cYou remember the exchange we had about lies and how difficult it is to remember them accurately?<\/p>\n
\u201cMr Perrottet, this is literally what you have just said some five or 10 minutes ago \u2026 you said Jeremy Greenwood was the one who offered it. And, I said, did Christian Ellis also know about that? And you said he would have known.\u201d<\/p>\n
Recalling evidence from Mr Ellis to the commission, in which he said he could not recall \u201cCharles doing consultant work for the company\u201d, Ms Dwyer said \u201cit appears that your friend, Mr Ellis, didn\u2019t want to disclose this arrangement to the commission either\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe thing about telling lies involving three other people is that you really need to get them on the same page about the lie that you are telling,\u201d Ms Dwyer said. <\/p>\n
\u201cI suggest to you that your friends have not given evidence consistent with the lie you\u2019ve told.\u201d<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied: \u201cI don\u2019t accept that.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cShould the commission expect that when Mr Greenwood gives evidence shortly, he will suddenly have some recall of a financial arrangement to compensate you for that advice?\u201d Ms Dwyer said. <\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied: \u201cI\u2019m not going to speculate\u201d about what Mr Greenwood will say.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pressed on his wife\u2019s work, Mr Perrottet said he didn\u2019t think Beckington paying her $150,000 for a year\u2019s part-time work was a significant amount.<\/p>\n
\u201cValue is in the eye of the beholder,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet told the commission his wife had held off on sending invoices until a year after work had started \u201cbecause Beckington had cashflow problems\u201d because of \u201cdifficulty extracting money from Jean Nassif\u201d. <\/p>\n
However, Ms Dwyer showed Charles Perrottet financial information showing Beckington \u201chad actually been paid a significant monthly retainer\u201d by Mr Nassif\u2019s company Toplace since July 28, 2020.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo, I can suggest you that there\u2019s no proper basis for your suggestion that they had cashflow problems by July 2019,\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet replied: \u201cWell, that\u2019s what Jeremy said to me.\u201d<\/p>\n
He said he did not have access to Beckington\u2019s accounts nor would have been aware of their expenses, which Ms Dwyer said was \u201cbuying coffee and travelling in their cars\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cI suggest to you that answer is fabricated, and I suggest to you that it does not make any sense that Mr Greenwood told Anita to hold off sending an invoice until June or July 2021?\u201d Ms Dwyer said.<\/p>\n
Charles Perrottet said he disagreed.<\/p>\n
Pressed further that he was \u201cdevising everything about these invoices and how they would be paid\u201d, Charles Perrottet again disagreed.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo \u2026 Christian informed me,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The commission was also told of a cheque for $148,500 from Mr Nassif to Beckington.<\/p>\n
Earlier, Charles Perrottet was told the revised invoice was sent on the same day a separate cheque was deposited by Mr Nassif\u2019s company Toplace into Beckington\u2019s account for $125,000.<\/p>\n