Allegation No. 25
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
·I!)> v Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry ·G.P.O. Box 5218, Sydney, N.S.W. 2001. FORMER PAPERS """ .-..... ,,, ·. :·~ . ""·· - ...· . /0§:. _... ··.' . ,, ·. 2 3 4 5 .·. R~ferre~ io '. Folio Referred to Date-.... Cleared ·. - Re$u.bmit No, ·· ALLEGATION NO . 25 / Central Railway Devel opment Enquiries in this matter commenced on Wednesday 31 July, 1986 which included familiarising ourselves with the allegation. On Friday 1 August, 1986 Mr Myers and I interviewed two Directors of a company known as Commuter Terminals Pty. Limited which was commissioned to submit a proposal to the Public Transport Authority on the redevelopment of Central Railway. The two Directors which were interviewed were Mr John Andrews, Architect and Mr Stan Edwards , Builder. Mr Andrews said that he was first approached by a Mr Warwick Colbron, Solicitor to have some drawings made for the redevelopment project. Mr Andrews had not known Colbron prior to this . Stan Edwards was asked by Andrews to determine cost and products estimates and had not known Colbron prior to this venture either . Neither men knew in what capacity Colbron was acting and both commented that he (Colbron) was a name dropper. They further stated that they knew no approaches to public figures (excl uding John Johnston MLA) to have the project accepted or promoted . No mention was made to either per son I, of any approach being mad e.,.. ... to Morgan Ryan or others and no known connection between Warwick Colbron and Abe Saffron. Unf or tuna tely time has not allowed us to interview Mr Warwick Colbron whom I believe to be a major figure in determi ning whether this allegation is worth proceeding with . I cons i der such an interview to be imperative to determine whether Mr Colbron had: ·-·~ 2 (a) ~any connection with Morgan RyanJ and; (b) acted either as an Agent or Solicitor for Abe Saffron. Documents such as files kept by Colbron ' s office re . the Central Railway Development Project and Trust Accounts showing the flow of moneys through his firm of Solicitors would be relevant evidence required should any further investigations be carried out . An attempt was also made to interview various officers of the now State Rail Authority. I rang David Hill ' s office on Tuesday 29 July re . interviewing staff at the Property Branch and himself re . this Inquiry . His Secretary informed me that Hill was overseas f or 1 month and that Mr Pat Johnson was currently acting in his position. I then spoke to a gentleman who was going to contact me again and arrange for these interviews to be made. I later found out that his name was Harley Dreghorne. I rang again on Wednesday 30 July at 10 . 00 a.m . and Mr Dreghorne on was out and I left a message . I again rang at 2.00 p.m. the same day Mr Dreghorne was again not present and I left another message . Other matters t hen became a greater priority and Mr Dreghorne finally returned ~ my call on 5 August, 1986 . He informed me that the Gener a 1 Manager of the Property Branch i s Len Freeman on telephone number He indicated to me that Mr Freeman is available for any interview regarding this matter. It has been indicated to me that the then General Manager of the Property Divis ion, Mr Fred Cl ut ton is dead and no doubt this will leave a considerable gap in any evidence necessary in regard to Mr Murphy's association. Amongst the State Rail Authority file, it is evident that on a number of occasions Mr Neville Wr an, the then Premier had made a number of approaches by way of Ministerial to the offices of the Public Transport Commission concerning the proposals put forward for the 3 developmen t of the Centr al Railway Complex however, I do not beli eve that these approaches were i n any way improper and in fact it would seem that they were done through the proper public channels . One aspect of this matter which appears quite interesting is the fact that Mr Hill at the time of his appointment to a Committee to investigate the development was an employee of t he Premier and it was at his instigation that the proposal to have Commuter Terminals Pty . Limited appointed as t he constructor of the new terminal be in fact cancelled the Public Transport Commission then undertook to subcontract t he work themselves . Stanley Edwards commented that Fred Clutton at this par t icular time was quite critical of David Hill and mentioned that David Hill had certain trips in certain trains at weekends and other facetious comments . -~···- Obviously our investigations have not resolved the background of this allegation and therefore I canno t offer any opinion as to its possible attributes. I reiterrate that Warwick Colbron;--s solicitor appears to be the trump man behind th i s allegation . 'Ihe Hen Mr 1:-i I< Hran r;t:; level 20 Aetna Life TcMer Cnr Elizabeth and Batliurst StreetB SW~ ?.SW 2000 Dear Mr Wran, As you 1r.ay Le dWar~ t.Le: l?c;l.l:lL:.r,~:i~t arf Ccr.; ;.:i.:.. :,:i.cr:. :.."'f Inquiry ~cit.ablish~ I-UJ:tii.w.nt lu ti.,2 Pa:di.:.. ;a.:.iH.i..~i::i Cc.1.r...i:;::..i.0~1 of Inquiry h.:'t 19b6 haa ccm:1¥;nc.:OO i :c.s t..c.sk o( i nquir.i ng ir.tu a.no advising the Farli~t whctl,Er u.Iiy con..:iuct cf tl':e J.<..i:ou r.2.l·le Ll.onel .Keu:..h ~:,ui.-ph:}I .r.a::. tJtXn bu..... l" : a .; t..> u1:1ccr1t, in it~ q.,inion, to proved mi.nl.A!l':iaviou.r witlu;1 tl11:: ITl<:!.. :ming of .::;e::cuc.m 72 of t.he 0..""IlStitut1on. 1'.rr S Charles (..C , &,lii(.,:i: Counsel. .:lGSisting the C.tr.r.ri.ssion, l:as inforJla;u mt: tlldt. h~ v,oul,i Le assibt-.r:<l by havin~ a discussion wi c.h you in .c~lation to 6Cl1~ u::.T.A::.\.-ts of tl1e Ccr..nd ssion ' s lu(uiry. l1,1.;u:irJi119l_y , l cihould b6: glad if you woul~ contact t,u: a.i..u-ltu Ofi '1.:oelE:phone nunber ( 02) 232 4922 to arrange a suitable t.ini& for an appoint.ment.' t.c, l:.:ie rr.aae. Yours faithfully Sir George Lush .Presiding Muibe.r 21 July 1906 ALLEl3ATIOO NO 25 Particulars of Allegation The Honourable Lionel Keith Murphy , in or about January 1980, and whilst a Justice of the High Court of Australia, agreed with furgan Ryan that he, the Judge, would make, or cause to be :nade, representations on behalf of interests associated with one Abraham Gilbert Saffron to persons in a position to influence the award of a contract to remodel the Central Railway Station in Sydney for the purpose of assisting those interests to obtain the contract. Further, the JUdge subsequently :nade such representations, and informed Ryan that he had done so, and that the representations were likely to be successful. At the relevant time, Saffron was, and was known by the Judge to be, a person of ill- repute. It will be contended that this a:mduct by the Judge amounted to misbehaviour within the meaning of section 72 of the Constitution in the follCMing respect - 2 a) entering into an agreement to intervene to influence the award of ~.J?~lic contract to a particular tenderer, and actually intervening to achieve that purpose; further, or in the alternative --····---- ··--,.,.------~ ___. ...._.... .. lb) ___ entering_ into an. agreement to intervene ..to _influence the award_of_a _publi~ oontract_to a tenderer associated _with a --~E.~~----..?-~--- -~!1-repute, _ and ·- actually__ intervening to . _achiey~_ t:E.at _e~se~-- 'As such it constituted conduct contrary to accepted standards of judicial behaviour. i l l MEETI NG WITH SUPERINTENDENT KEN DREW, CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE NEW SOUTH WALES POLICE COMMISSIONER At 2.30 on 16th of July, 1986 I met with Superintendent Drew at the 20th Floor of the Police Headquarters Building in College Street, Sydney. Also present were Patricia Sharp, Sergeant R Clarke of the Licensing Squad and Detective Sergeant R Lynch of L the Brt3king Squad. I briefly outlined our function and said that we were seeking the co-operation of the NSW Pol ice in relation to a number of allegations that had been made in relation to His Honour Mr Justice Murphy. We discussed briefly various provisions of our act. As an opening gambit I suggest that the NSW Police Force must have collected a considerable body of intelligence on Abraham Saffron over the years. I asked whether any link between Saffron and His Honour had been uncovered at any time by the NSW Pol ice. Superintendent Drew said that apart from what Ja mes McCartney Anderson had told Sergeant Warren Molloy (as to which see later) no link between Saffron and His Honour had come to light. That was confirmed by Detective Sergeant Clarke who from the early 1980 's has been the Officer in Charge of the general licensing in the Kings Cross region; and by Detective Sergeant Lynch, who has been responsible for investigating the activities of Todor ('the Torch') Maximovich over the last few years. Sergeant Clarke said that Warren Molloy had a far more detailed knowledge of Saffron's operations because of his posit ion as Special Licensing Sergeant in the Kings Cross reg ion up until the time of the Bi 11 Allen affair.