Web view15 you see there an email from yourself to Mr Stewart, 16 Mr Hamilton, jdean@ csisafety ... Rod Driver and.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 329 J L O

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO TRADE UNION GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION

Level 19, 55 Market Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 10.00am (Day 3)

Before the Commissioner: The Hon. John Dyson Heydon AC QC

Counsel Assisting: Ms S McNaughton SC Mr Thomas Prince

Instructed by: Minter Ellison, Solicitors

.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 274 Transcript produced by DTI

1 <JASON JOHN JENNINGS, on former oath: [10.00am] 2 3 <EXAMINATION BY MS McNAUGHTON CONTINUING: 4 5 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms McNaughton? 6 7 MS McNAUGHTON: Thank you, Commissioner. I assume 8 Mr Jennings is on his former oath? 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Jennings, you understand that 11 the oath you took yesterday applies to your evidence today 12 as well. 13 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Commissioner. 15 16 MS McNAUGHTON: Commissioner, we have just been informed 17 that a Notice to Produce on CSI and CCW and relevantly, for 18 what I'm saying now, the CCW Notice to Produce which 19 produced intake forms, they have all been produced just 20 before 10 o'clock. I have not yet seen any of them. It 21 has been electronically produced. It may be that I will 22 need to see that before I can complete Mr Jennings' 23 examination. 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: Perhaps we can have an adjournment for 26 that purpose when the time arises. 27 28 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes, thank you. 29 30 Q. Mr Jennings, do you have before you the Accounting 31 Analysis folder that we left you with yesterday, MFI-14? 32 A. No. Thank you. 33 34 Q. You will recall I asked you about a series of 35 proximate transactions yesterday. 36 A. Sorry, what tab was that? 37 38 Q. The last tab, tab 14. 39 A. Sorry, I missed that, sorry. 14, yes. 40 41 Q. I asked you about a series of proximate in date and 42 similar amount transactions yesterday. Do you recall that? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Can I just ask you about another set similar to that. 46 On page 137, do you see there what appears to be a receipt 47 on the letterhead of JLT, evidencing that an amount of

.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 275 J J JENNINGS (Ms McNaughton) Transcript produced by DTI

1 $35,647.50 has been received from "CFMEU ACT - CSI Member 2 Benefits". Do you see that? 3 A. Yes, I do. 4 5 Q. If you could turn over to page 140, and just to make 6 sense of that document, that is the third page of a bank 7 statement for the cheque account of the CFMEU ACT which 8 started on page 138. It has been put up on the screen 9 there. Back at page 140, do you see the last entry on the 10 page, 13 June, "BPAY JARDINE LLOYD". It is an electronic 11 transfer, it would appear, for that same amount of money 12 which resulted with the receipt being issued, it would 13 appear. Do you see that? 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. Can I ask you now to turn over to page 142. Do you 17 see this is a Westpac account for, it would appear, if you 18 go a little way down the top of the page, under "Dickson 19 ACT": 20 21 ACCOUNT NAME 22 23 Construction Employment Training & Welfare 24 Limited [as Trustee for] Creative Safety 25 Initiatives Trust. 26 27 Do you see that that's the bank account? 28 A. Yes, I do. 29 30 Q. That is the day before 12 June. The last of the 31 12 June entries is described as "withdrawal" for a series 32 of numbers to CFMEU of $40,000? 33 A. I see that. 34 35 Q. Can you explain why, if you know, CSI is paying to the 36 CFMEU almost the same amount at about the same time as the 37 premium is paid by the CFMEU to JLT? 38 A. That would have been something that Glenn Carlos was 39 handling, I would assume. 40 41 Q. So is your answer "I don't know"? 42 A. Yes, I don't exactly know the background behind - 43 maybe an interim distribution from the Trust. 44 45 Q. It's very proximate in time, would you agree, with the 46 payment by the CFMEU to JLT? 47 A. That's what it seems to be, yes.


1 2 Q. Are you saying you don't know whether or not that's 3 pursuant to some sort of understanding or some sort of 4 arrangement? 5 A. I would only assume that it would be something to do 6 with the Trust distribution. 7 8 Q. Yes. But the money coming out of the CSI, if I can 9 call it that, the Westpac account -- 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. -- of $40,000 comes to the CFMEU within, we've seen 13 now two instances, either a day before or a day after a 14 payment is made in relation to the CSI Member Benefits 15 Trust for the JLT. Is that a coincidence on both of those 16 occasions or is that pursuant to some sort of agreement or 17 arrangement? 18 A. I can't recall. I don't remember that situation. 19 20 Q. Thank you. That can be put to one side. Can I now 21 show you another folder and also, sir, if you could have 22 made available to you volume 3 of MFI-3. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: This new folder you want -- 25 26 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes, if that could be received into 27 evidence, please. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: That will be CSI MFI-15 on the usual 30 terms as to objection. 31 32 CSI MFI-15 - FOLDER TITLED "CFMEU FUNDS CSI & RELATED 33 ENTITIES INCOME PROTECTION INSURANCE" 34 35 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. Before we open the new folder, do you 36 have volume 3 before you now, sir? 37 A. It is the larger of the two; is that right? 38 39 Q. The larger of the two, yes. It should have 40 "Examination Bundle Volume 3" on the front, if that 41 assists. 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Do you recall me taking you to yesterday what would 45 appear to be a hardcopy print-out of a Powerpoint 46 presentation in relation to the JDT? 47 A. Yes, I do. What page would that be again?


1 2 Q. Could you turn to page 690. Do you see part of the 3 benefits that JLT is providing, or says it can provide, to 4 the CFMEU, at the second dot point is: 5 6 - The JDT offers to Members an additional 7 reason for being a Member of the CFMEU 8 9 And then it says: 10 11 - Greater flexibility in the level, type 12 and format of the cover. The member gets 13 the cover they want as opposed to a 14 standard, "off the shelf" product. 15 16 Do you see that? 17 A. Whereabouts was it again? Halfway - I'm just trying - 18 sorry, 690? 19 20 Q. On page 690, there's the heading "Summary", do you see 21 that? 22 A. Yes, I've opened it at that one. 23 24 Q. The first dot point. Go to the second dot point. 25 A. Yes, correct. 26 27 Q. I've just read out the beginning of the first dot 28 point: 29 30 - The JDT offers to Members an additional 31 reason for being a Member of the CFMEU. 32 33 And one of the sub-points is: 34 35 - Greater flexibility in the level, type 36 and format of the cover. The member gets 37 the cover they want as opposed to a 38 standard, "off the shelf" product. 39 40 Do you see that? 41 A. I see that. 42 43 Q. It would appear that one of the selling points of this 44 product is that it can be designed, shaped, flexibly, for 45 whatever the member would like. Do you see that? 46 Yesterday, I was asking you about whether or not you could 47 recall anything about how that product came to be designed


1 for the CFMEU or latterly CSI, and you said it was up to 2 JLT; that you couldn't offer any input into that. Do you 3 recall that you said it was JLT's product, or words to that 4 effect? Well, can I ask you - sorry, I'll let you answer. 5 A. Yes, I'm just trying to think back from yesterday, 6 yes. 7 8 Q. Can I ask you this: were you involved in designing 9 the product that was going to be offered to members? 10 A. Not that I can remember. 11 12 Q. Do you see from that that it would appear to be a 13 product which could be specifically designed in order to 14 suit the needs of both employers and presumably CFMEU 15 members? 16 A. Well, from what that looks like, yes. 17 18 Q. Could you please now turn to the folder that you've 19 been handed most recently, MFI-15, and go to the first tab. 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. Do you see there that's a one-page document? 23 A. Yes, I do. 24 25 Q. Were you involved in finalising this, or something 26 similar to this, to be provided to either employers or, 27 indeed, employees? 28 A. I may have been near the end. 29 30 Q. What do you mean by "near the end"? 31 A. Well, there was work done, I believe, at the CFMEU 32 regarding the product before it was handed - before CSI. 33 It's a period of time ago. I'm just trying to remember 34 that. 35 36 Q. It says under that photograph, or above the photograph 37 it calls itself "Insurance"? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. And then it says: 41 42 JLT leading the way on income protection. 43 44 The JLT (CSI) Discretionary Trust is 45 specifically designed for the affiliated 46 members of the CFMEU ... 47


1 What does "affiliated members of the CFMEU" mean? 2 A. Well, I'd assume by looking at that it was 3 people/members that would sign up to the policy, or to the 4 Trust. 5 6 Q. Do you mean by that employers? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. 10 ... and offers a unique and innovative 11 alternative to traditional insurance cover. 12 13 Were you involved in determining whether or not those words 14 were appropriate to be included in this document or a 15 document similar to this? 16 A. I don't believe so. 17 18 Q. Do you see how there's types of cover and level of 19 cover set out in the bottom section of the form? 20 A. Yes, I do. 21 22 Q. Gold, Silver and Bronze? 23 A. Mmm-hmm. 24 25 Q. It would appear that this part of the form relates to 26 the component of the scheme where traditional insurance 27 kicks in after the excess, if one can call it that, is 28 reached. So this is about the traditional component which 29 kicks in after a certain point? 30 A. The level of cover? 31 32 Q. Yes. Do you understand that? 33 A. No, I don't understand what you mean. 34 35 Q. Can I ask you this: in relation to the Gold, Silver 36 and Bronze cover, do you notice in relation to the "Gold" 37 cover, the last line of that description says it "includes 38 Workers' Compensation top up"? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. Do you see Silver and Bronze don't include that line? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Do you understand that Silver and Bronze cover did not 45 include workers compensation top-up? 46 A. From what that says, yes. 47


1 Q. Were you involved in that decision? 2 A. Not that I can remember. 3 4 Q. Who would have been involved, to your knowledge? 5 A. I don't know what the - do you know what the date of 6 the flyer is? 7 8 Q. No, but are you able to say - actually, yes. In the 9 index, all I can indicate to you, from what we've been 10 provided with, is that the flyer behind tab 1 relates to 11 the 2012-2013 years. The flyer behind tab 2 is 2013-2014 12 and behind tab 3 is 2014-2015. Does that -- 13 A. It could be Glenn Carlos. Jason O'Mara, maybe. 14 I don't know. 15 16 Q. They were the two men who had carriage of looking 17 after the insurance product, were they? 18 A. No, Glenn - from CSI's side was Glenn Carlos, yes. 19 20 Q. And from CFMEU's perspective? 21 A. Well, being an EBA, it would be would be Jason 22 O'Mara - EBA initiative. 23 24 Q. By that answer, do I take it that Jason O'Mara was the 25 person who looked after, or the head person who looked 26 after EBAs for the CFMEU ACT? 27 A. That's correct. That's my understanding, yes. 28 29 Q. Thank you. Can I ask you now to go back to volume 3. 30 Do you still have that with you? 31 A. I do. That's the large one? 32 33 Q. Yes, the larger one. 34 A. Yes, sorry, yes. 35 36 Q. Can I ask you please to turn to page 848. Do you see 37 halfway down the page, because it goes in reverse 38 chronological order, it starts with an email from 39 Craig Anderson to yourself? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. The subject is: 43 44 Built-Plus - Gold, Silver and Bronze one 45 pagers: 46 47 Hi JJ,


1 2 Please find attached the draft one pagers 3 as discussed. I will have our graphics 4 team pretty it up a little bit, but in the 5 meantime can you check the content to 6 ensure this is what you are after? 7 8 I've removed the CFMEU logo and all 9 reference to the Union as requested, I can 10 add in the CSI logo if you like, just let 11 me know. 12 13 You apparently reply to that a little bit later. The first 14 one is 18 June and you reply on 26 June 2012 and you say: 15 16 Jason, 17 18 As discussed this morning ... 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: No, Mr Anderson says that. 21 22 MS McNAUGHTON: I beg your pardon. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Is this the case: Mr Jennings got back 25 to Mr Anderson and had a discussion on the morning of 26 26 June. 27 28 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes, indeed. I beg your pardon. 29 I withdraw what I just asked. Thank you, Commissioner. 30 31 Q. There is a further email to you on 26 June which 32 indicates, does it, that you had a discussion directly with 33 Mr Anderson that morning? 34 A. I may have. 35 36 Q. You may have? 37 A. Well, thinking back, yes. 38 39 Q. What's the doubt? 40 A. I can't remember if I had a conversation or not. 41 42 Q. Can you look at the document in front of you and 43 indicate whether or not you believe that reflects the 44 conversation? It says: 45 46 Jason,. 47


1 As discussed this morning ... 2 3 A. Yes, I saw that part, yes. 4 5 Q. Do you doubt Mr Anderson in the email or not? 6 A. Can I just read the whole document? 7 8 Q. Certainly. 9 A. And your question again was? 10 11 Q. I was just asking you to look at the document and 12 confirm whether or not -- 13 A. It seems like we've had a discussion. 14 15 Q. Yes. Behind that chain of emails are three, what 16 appear to be one pagers as it would appear to have been 17 referred to in that email chain, would you agree? 18 A. That's what it says, yes. 19 20 Q. The first one at page 849 is "Built Plus Bronze". Do 21 you see that? That's the third line down on the top 22 left-hand corner. 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. It says: 26 27 Distinctive. Choice. 28 29 Do you see that? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Under "Key Features and Benefits of Built-Plus 33 Include", it says: 34 35 - Established specifically for 36 Construction and Allied Workers. 37 38 And it goes on. It sets out at the third dot point: 39 40 - 100% of Gross weekly wages paid to a 41 maximum of $700 + superannuation (based 42 upon the weekly contribution paid by your 43 employer via an EBA) 44 45 Do you see that? 46 A. On the left-hand side? 47


1 Q. On the right-hand side, do you see the third dot 2 point? 3 A. Oh, yes. Yes. 4 5 Q. And the second dot point: 6 7 - Coverage provided for injuries and 8 illnesses that occur outside working hours 9 24 hours a day, 7 days per week. 10 11 Do you see that? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. It also says that there's a 28-day waiting period for 15 all claims. 16 A. That's what it says, yes. 17 18 Q. Does it indicate anywhere on this form, sir, that it 19 is not insurance? 20 A. That it's not insurance? 21 22 Q. Yes. 23 A. Like I said, it's a JLT form and, yes, it doesn't seem 24 to. 25 26 Q. It appears that you were involved in checking the 27 content? 28 A. By the email? 29 30 Q. Yes. 31 A. Yes, it talks about logos. I don't necessarily know 32 about wording. 33 34 Q. It said: 35 36 ... in the meantime can you check the 37 content to ensure this is what you are 38 after? 39 40 A. Like I said, from my memory, I don't have - as the 41 promoter, don't have any say over the wording. 42 43 Q. Do you notice in relation to Bronze cover, that it did 44 not include the top-up aspect, that is, it didn't amplify 45 what WorkCover paid, it was only outside of the ambit of 46 the working day? 47 A. That's - yes.


1 2 Q. Was that your choice? 3 A. No, not that I can remember from there. I had no 4 involvement in what was in and out. 5 6 Q. Did anywhere on this form make clear that the 7 information on this form was dealing with a component of 8 the scheme being offered by JLT under the EBA, rather than 9 the whole of the scheme? 10 A. Sorry, can you just repeat that? 11 12 Q. Do you understand, or don't you, that the scheme 13 offered by JLT that the EBA clause referred to, and that 14 employers signed up to, had two aspects to it which meant 15 that - because of one of the aspects being entirely 16 discretionary, that the whole product could not be 17 described as insurance. Do you understand that? 18 A. I know I - I basically understood something about the 19 discretionary part of it, yes. 20 21 Q. Did this form make it clear what part of the product 22 is being referred to, or do you think it's confusing? 23 A. It could be seen, yes, it doesn't make it clear. 24 25 Q. It's called Built-Plus Bronze and Built-Plus is the 26 product referred to in the EBA, would you agree? 27 A. Like I said yesterday, I don't have involvement in the 28 EBAs, but I believe it says Built-Plus, yes. 29 30 Q. It is the case that some of the details on this form 31 are referring to the traditional insurance component, on 32 the one hand, but, on the other hand, the form is headed 33 "Built-Plus Bronze", do you agree that it could be regarded 34 as a misleading description? 35 A. Is it - yes, I -- 36 37 Q. I mean, was any other form handed out about the 38 discretionary - the purely discretionary part of the 39 scheme, along with this form? 40 A. I don't know when this form was handed out. 41 42 Q. Do you recall whether or not you settled any other one 43 pager, which was handed out with this one pager, or was 44 available perhaps to be handed out, to make it clear that 45 one component of the scheme was discretionary and another 46 component might have had these features that are under the 47 heading "Key Features and Benefits of Built Plus Include"?


1 A. There might have been another form. I can't remember. 2 3 Q. Do you see on the next page, 850 -- 4 A. Yes, I do. 5 6 Q. -- there's a form about Built-Plus Gold and then 7 Built-Plus Silver on the following page. Do you see that? 8 A. Yes, I do. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: Each of these pages at the bottom 11 refers to "Product Disclosure Statement". It says that the 12 advice in the document is general, but there is a Product 13 Disclosure Statement. Where is that? 14 15 MS McNAUGHTON: We have seen that in the materials, 16 Commissioner, volume 2. They start at tab 45 of volume 2. 17 There are different versions. There is one for 2012; 18 tab 46 is for 2013 and tab 47 is for 2014. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Who gets that? The companies or the 21 Potential Member, with a capital P and a capital M? 22 23 MS McNAUGHTON: It is to be assumed that they get that, 24 yes. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: Do the employees get it? 27 28 MS McNAUGHTON: We have no evidence about that. 29 30 Q. Can I ask you now, sir, to go to page 859. Do you see 31 there an email from Jason Jennings, yourself, with your CSI 32 email address? 33 A. Yes, I do, yes. 34 35 Q. It is sent to Craig Anderson who appears to be 36 associated with JLT? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. Copied in are Mr Hall and Mr O'Mara. The subject is 40 "Very disappointed."? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. 44 Hi Craig 45 46 As discussed a number of times over the 47 last couple of weeks I am still yet to find


1 out when the administration fees due to CSI 2 will be paid. 3 4 I would like a firm answer to this by COB 5 today. 6 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. Can you indicate to the Commission, if you can recall, 10 why Mr Hall and Mr O'Mara were copied in to that email? 11 A. I can't exactly recall why, but I think around - yes, 12 I can't recall why. 13 14 Q. Could I now ask you, please, to go to page 863. Do 15 you see there an email from yourself to Mr Stewart, 16 Mr Hamilton, [email protected], you and 17 [email protected]? 18 A. Yes, I see that. 19 20 Q. The subject is: 21 22 JLT income protection moving forward from 23 1 September 2012 24 25 Hi all 26 27 Please find attached the new JLT income 28 protection procedure moving forward from 29 1 September 2012. 30 31 Could you please all read this procedure 32 and come back to me ASAP if you require any 33 further information. 34 35 Garry and Josh, I have also attached the 36 new JLT sign up forms and DPS that you will 37 get employers to fill out/read when signing 38 their EBAs (Josh please call me to discuss 39 how this is to be done and when Garry gets 40 back you will have to update him on this). 41 42 Josh, I have also added the Gold, Silver 43 and Bronze cover info sheets, please save 44 them on the CFMEU drive and also talk to 45 Jason and see if he would like some printed 46 out and put on the front counter. 47


1 A considerable amount of time has been put 2 into streamlining the procedure for JLT so 3 if you could all follow it until further 4 notices, that would be great. 5 6 That's signed by you, sir. Do you see that? 7 A. That's, yes, from me. 8 9 Q. That would appear to be that you in fact have quite a 10 role in the development of these documents and this 11 product, would you agree? 12 A. I was forwarding on, what it seems, the documents from 13 JLT. 14 15 Q. So you were just a postbox, is that what you say? 16 A. Well, I worked for CSI, which was the promoter -- 17 18 Q. Right. 19 A. -- and before I was forwarding on the forms to the 20 right parties. 21 22 Q. At page 865 we have the JLT Procedure which I think we 23 saw yesterday? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. Before we continue on, who were Garry and Josh? 27 A. They worked for the CFMEU, or at the time worked for 28 the CFMEU. 29 30 Q. What are their full names, do you know? 31 A. Garry Hamilton, Josh Stephens. 32 33 Q. Are they legal officers or -- 34 A. I believe Garry is a legal officer. 35 36 Q. And how about Josh? 37 A. No, I think he was just an admin. 38 39 Q. Sorry, a -- 40 A. Admin person. 41 42 Q. Admin? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Could I now ask you to go to page 887. This is for 46 September 2012 and, just to remind you, it is apparent from 47 tab 39 in volume 2 that the Discretionary Trust Deed was


1 signed on 1 June 2012. Do you accept that from me? We can 2 go to it if you need to. 3 A. Yes, we might go to it. Is that okay? 4 5 Q. It is tab 39 in volume 2 and in particular to see the 6 date, page 470. 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. While we're on that page, just to remind ourselves, 10 the "Promoter" is there defined as: 11 12 Construction Employment Training and 13 Welfare Limited as Trustee for the Creative 14 Safety Initiatives Trust. 15 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. At page 481, Mr Hall and yourself have signed that, or 19 executed the Deed? 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. Can we now go back to page 887. I will ask you some 23 questions arising out of some documents starting on this 24 page. This is an email from Craig Anderson to Dean Hall. 25 It's copied through to you at CSI "RE: Fee Breakdown". 26 Could we start, because things go chronologically backwards 27 with the email print-outs, looking at page 888. 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. There's an email from you to Craig on 3 September 2012 31 at 5.54pm. You're replying to his letter or email which 32 starts at the foot of that page, but you're saying: 33 34 Craig 35 36 Thanks for that. 37 38 I am very concerned that this is the first 39 time after numerous requests about payment 40 of the admin fee to CSI you tell me that a 41 large number of employers have not been 42 making their payment on time or at all. 43 44 As you know we have made one of our staff 45 members available (Clyde Stewart) since the 46 start of this some 18 months ago to follow 47 up with employers to make sure they are


1 making their payments and making them on 2 time. 3 4 It seems like this resource has been very 5 much under-utilised. 6 7 Mr Clyde Stewart was an employee of the CFMEU, not CSI, 8 that's right, isn't it? 9 A. That's correct. 10 11 Q. Then we go up the page. In fact, right at the top of 12 page 888 is the beginning of that email from Dean Hall to 13 yourself. He writes: 14 15 JLT 16 17 We have several companies who have legally 18 binding agreements. These agreements 19 require contributions to income protection 20 insurance. Please confirm current lists of 21 employers. We have a dedicated employee, 22 at a significant cost, dedicated. Please 23 help us fix this issue. 24 25 Signed "Dean". It would appear as at the time that the 26 Deed was executed setting up this Discretionary Trust, that 27 it was a CFMEU worker who was doing the admin work, not a 28 CSI worker who was doing the admin work. 29 A. Well, I was involved. 30 31 Q. But you said - and correct me if I'm wrong - yesterday 32 that the reason CSI was put as the counterparty to the Deed 33 and not CFMEU was because it was CSI's workers that were 34 involved in the administration, but that's not right, is 35 it? 36 A. Well, I was involved at the start. This is, I think, 37 at the start of the Trust setting up. 38 39 Q. Yes, but apparently it is Mr Clyde Stewart, it is 40 clear has been set aside, and he's an employee of the CFMEU 41 not CSI? 42 A. Yes. I think he was doing part of it. 43 44 Q. It doesn't explain, does it, the admin arrangements as 45 to why it was CSI and not CFMEU which was the named person 46 on the Deed? 47 A. We were starting to set the admin processes up, from


1 my memory, around that time. 2 3 Q. Back at page 887, two-thirds of the way down the page, 4 an email that I started with from Craig Anderson to 5 Dean Hall, copied to you, and under that box it says: 6 7 We also have Interspan and BKH Group which 8 are coming on in September. I have their 9 application forms and only require their 10 employee declarations to finalise, which 11 are due in the first week of September 12 [sic] ... 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: October. 15 16 MS McNAUGHTON: Sorry, October. 17 18 Q. 19 I will send a list of outstanding invoices 20 to Clyde to follow up as per the procedure 21 document. 22 23 Do you see that? His understanding, per the Procedure 24 document, was that Clyde Stewart was the relevant person 25 and he worked for the CFMEU; that's right? 26 A. Like I said, Clyde was doing part of that at that 27 stage, from my memory. 28 29 Q. But it doesn't explain, does it, why CSI was the 30 company named on the Deed rather than CFMEU? 31 A. Well, CSI was the promoter. 32 33 Q. Why was CSI the promoter, sir? 34 A. We were gearing up the admin to be the promoter around 35 the time of that. 36 37 Q. You were gearing it up? 38 A. Starting it off, yes. 39 40 Q. Although it appears that Clyde Stewart had been set 41 aside at the CFMEU? 42 A. For part of it, from my understanding, yes. 43 44 Q. Nothing on these documents I've shown you indicates 45 that you're gearing up for CSI to take over the admin, 46 rather, the documents indicate it was Clyde Stewart from 47 the CFMEU, would you agree?


1 A. Well, from that, but from my memory, that was what was 2 happening around the time of the signing of the Deed. 3 4 Q. You say it's nothing to do with keeping the name of 5 the Union off the Deed? 6 A. I believe not, no. 7 8 Q. Can I now ask you, please, to turn to 892. We just 9 quickly can see in that email to you from Mr Truscott, that 10 Clyde is still the person doing the work; do you agree? 11 12 MR AGIUS: I just wonder whether my friend has missed 13 page 890, Mr Commissioner? 14 15 MS McNAUGHTON: We covered that yesterday, Mr Agius. 16 17 MR AGIUS: It just seems to bear upon the questions that 18 are being asked now. I would ask that the witness's 19 attention be taken to it. 20 21 MS McNAUGHTON: Certainly, I will do that. 22 23 Q. At page 890, do you see there that email I think you 24 saw yesterday: 25 26 I have recently started at CSI as a chief 27 finance officer for CSI, CCW and CFMEU. 28 29 That's from Mr Glenn Carlos. Do you recall that from 30 yesterday? 31 A. Was that the document we looked at yesterday, was it? 32 33 Q. I believe so. 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: I am not sure we did look at it 36 yesterday. It is unmarked by me, so if we did look at 37 it -- 38 39 MS McNAUGHTON: I'll withdraw that, if that's the case, 40 I've certainly got it flagged, but I might be mistaken. 41 42 Q. Certainly it was raised with you that Mr Carlos was 43 starting at that time; I went through that with you in some 44 detail? 45 46 THE COMMISSIONER: That was raised. 47


1 THE WITNESS: Yes, correct. 2 3 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. It goes on: 4 5 Jason Jennings gave me a brief rundown on 6 the JLT (CSI) Discretionary Trust yesterday 7 and asked that I take over the financial 8 aspects (monthly statements, debtor stuff) 9 and develop a set of procedures for the 10 ongoing administration of the partnership. 11 12 A. That's when Glenn Carlos took over, yes. 13 14 Q. The Deed that we have seen was executed in June, so do 15 you say that Mr Carlos was, or someone in his position, was 16 already, in your mind, at that time, going to be taking 17 over the admin? 18 A. We were starting - we were taking over - as the 19 promoter, we were going to be doing the admin, yes, or 20 compliance. So from - I think there was a lag time from 21 the time of the Deed until Glenn took over, from my memory. 22 23 Q. So you voluntarily decided in June, did you, to do 24 that, to do the admin? It wasn't the case that you, in 25 June, had decided you were going to take on the admin as at 26 June and, therefore, you should be on the name -- 27 A. The discussion was that we were going to - we're 28 taking on the Trust as the promoter. 29 30 Q. Can I now ask you to turn to page 995. Do you see 31 there that this is the third page of a minutes of meeting 32 which was held on 2 April 2014? Do you see that? 33 A. Yes, I do. 34 35 Q. Apparently it occurred at Adelaide at the offices of 36 JLT. 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. And various things are discussed. Perhaps if we start 40 at page 993, do you see the first item, according to these 41 minutes, was "CSI (Member Benefits) JDT"? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Then over the page there's something about 45 "Journey Cover", and then the third item "CSI 24/7 JDT". 46 Does that mean the Discretionary Trust product is the 47 subject of the EBA clause, to your understanding?


1 A. It seems to be. 2 3 Q. It talks about "current rates" and the like. And then 4 it goes over at page 995, fourth line down: 5 6 JLT to provide the Union with a listing of 7 employers and employees on a monthly basis 8 which would enable them [the Union] to 9 compare our listing against their 10 membership. Compliance person to action. 11 12 Do you see that? 13 A. Sorry, where are you reading? 14 15 Q. Page 995. 16 A. 995, yes. 17 18 Q. The fourth line down from the top. 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. I might start at the top of the page: 22 23 Dean said he believes some employers are 24 not declaring their employee numbers 25 correctly and therefore the Union may 26 consider the possibility of conducting 27 regular audits. JLT to provide the Union 28 with a listing of employers and employees 29 on a monthly basis which would enable 30 them - 31 32 -- that would appear to be the Union -- 33 34 - to compare our listing against their 35 membership. Compliance person to action. 36 Dean advised they will monitor the 37 situation & provide feedback to JLT. 38 39 Discussion was then held on the Trust 40 Surplus. 41 42 It was agreed there is a benefit to keeping 43 premiums at bay & to maintain financial 44 flexibility. 45 46 Dean suggested the surplus be distributed 47 amongst members.


1 2 Surplus splits for 2014/15 to be: 3 4 JLT 20%. 5 CSI 80%. 6 7 Jason suggested that the splits for the 8 future year be discussed annually at the 9 Renewal meeting. 10 11 Do you see that? 12 A. I see that, yes. 13 14 Q. 15 The Union have employed a Compliance 16 person. Dean advised caution was required 17 regarding transparency of the Union's 18 actions & especially around how their 19 members' money is spent. They must obtain 20 the best possible deal for members at all 21 times. The Union will provide JLT with a 22 report on how money is spent, for example, 23 on Suicide Prevention & Rehabilitation 24 programs. 25 26 Do you see that? 27 A. I see that. 28 29 Q. It goes on: 30 31 JLT fees to stay the same for the 2014 Fund 32 Year & agreed 20% of the surplus, the same 33 as the 2013/2014 year. 34 35 The "Jason" appears to be you because I think you are the 36 only Jason at that meeting: 37 38 Jason noticed that the line item called 39 'CFMEU Fee' on JLT's '2013/14 Contribution 40 Required Allocations' sheet should not be 41 named as such. Graeme and Craig to have 42 this amended. 43 44 Do you see that? 45 A. I see that. 46 47 Q. It appears that the Union has a compliance person?


1 A. They're minutes from JLT, are they? 2 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Yes. Well, Glenn Carlos was handling the compliance. 5 I don't know why they'd say that. 6 7 Q. So you think that's not correct? 8 A. Well, I know that Glenn Carlos was handling the JLT at 9 CSI. 10 11 Q. Glenn Carlos, though, was also, you've indicated in 12 your evidence yesterday, employed by the CFMEU - sorry, 13 also did work for the CFMEU? 14 A. Did their books, yes. 15 16 Q. He did their books? 17 A. Accounts. The accounts. He was the CFO. 18 19 Q. And also, we've seen, CCW as well? 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. So he's got three hats that he could be wearing when 23 his name is included in a document; that's right, isn't it? 24 A. Yes, that's right. 25 26 Q. And the text of that minute of that meeting would 27 appear to be that it is the Union hat, if it's him being 28 mentioned, that he's wearing, would you agree? 29 A. When he's working for CSI. 30 31 Q. Did the Union pay for any of his time? 32 A. Probably not, no. 33 34 Q. You don't believe so? 35 A. From my memory, no. 36 37 Q. Can you just go to 1067. 38 A. Page 1067? 39 40 Q. Yes, please. 41 A. What volume? 42 43 Q. It is the same volume. 44 A. Page 1067, sorry. 45 46 Q. Have you got that? 47 A. Yes, I do, yes.


1 2 Q. From Graeme Truscott to yourself: 3 4 Hi Jason, 5 6 Good having chat earlier. 7 8 Here are the minutes of our meeting. Copy 9 was previously sent to Glenn. 10 11 Have a good weekend. 12 13 Graeme. 14 15 It appears you've got a copy of those minutes? 16 A. Yes, I may have back then, yes. 17 18 Q. Nothing struck you as incorrect, such that you needed 19 to revise them; is that the position? 20 A. I may not have read them. 21 22 Q. Can I now ask you to turn back to page 935. Keeping 23 in mind that it was discussed in the document we just saw 24 in relation to the surplus, the suggestion was that the 25 surplus should go to CSI. Do you recall reading that just 26 recently, or 70 per cent of the surplus should go to CSI? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. Sorry, 80 per cent, I beg your pardon. 80 per cent. 30 That's page 995, if you would like to just remind yourself. 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. Could you now go to 935. 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. Halfway down the page, from Glenn Carlos to 37 Graeme Truscott: 38 39 Graeme 40 41 You phoned and advised that the previous 42 year trust is almost finalised ... 43 44 So we're now back at the end of 2013. 45 46 ... and ready for the surplus to be 47 distributed. You advised that the surplus


1 would be around $180,095. 2 3 We have earlier agreed that the Trust 4 surplus would be distributed as follows: 5 6 70% for the benefit of the members; 7 8 And just to clarify your understanding, the members would 9 be the employers? 10 A. That's my understanding, yes. 11 12 Q. 13 15% to be retained for future financial 14 requirements of the Trust; and 15 per cent 15 to be retained by JLT. 16 17 In relation to the 70% (around 18 $126,066.50), we would like these funds 19 paid to: 20 21 Creative Safety Initiatives Trust. 22 23 It goes on and gives the bank account details. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. 27 It is intended that these funds will be 28 used to increase the skills and 29 capabilities of the members of the building 30 and construction industry, together with 31 the specific welfare and support 32 requirements for this sector. The welfare 33 component would be handled through our 34 jointly managed entity, Construction 35 Charitable Works. 36 37 And it goes on. 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. Could we then go to page 950, in the first instance. 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. At the bottom of 950, from Glenn Carlos to people at 44 JDT: 45 46 47


1 Craig 2 3 Thanks. Please find attached the donation 4 invoice made out to JLT (CSI) Discretionary 5 Trust, including specific reference to the 6 Construction Charitable Trust (CCW), as 7 requested. 8 9 The reply to Mr Carlos is just above, on page 950: 10 11 Sorry, Glenn - probably should've spelt out 12 in my earlier email that the invoice should 13 come from the charity - auditor is looking 14 for a documentary link to ensure that the 15 monies are linked between the Trust and 16 CCW. 17 18 Apologies for the inconvenience. 19 20 And then above that, the revised invoice from CCW is sent 21 across from Mr Carlos. Do you see that? 22 A. Whereabouts am I seeing that? 23 24 Q. Sorry, that's at the bottom of page 949 to the top of 25 page 950. 26 A. That's what it seems, yes. 27 28 Q. And then internal emails, it would appear: 29 30 Attached is an invoice for a donation on 31 behalf of the CSI JDT. I have approved 32 payment from surpluses available and the 33 invoice should now reflect accurately the 34 payment to the charity as a donation from 35 the JDT to the charity. 36 37 Do you see that? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. Was that arrangement made after any consultation with 41 any employers or the like? 42 A. What, the payment to Construction Charitable Works? 43 44 Q. Yes. Well, first of all it was to CSI and then it was 45 suggested by the Trust it should go to CCW. Was any of 46 that the subject of any consultation with any employers who 47 were members?


1 A. I believe that would be the trustee of the JLT, yes. 2 3 Q. Do I take that, as an answer from your perspective, to 4 be "no"? 5 A. I don't know if the trustee contacted them. 6 7 Q. Just for completeness, page 951, that appears to be on 8 the same topic or repeats of the same email. Do you see 9 that? 10 A. I'm looking in the middle of the page; is that right? 11 12 Q. Yes. I think it repeats what we've already seen. 13 A. Well, yes. It seems, yes, that way. 14 15 Q. From your perspective, you have no knowledge of how 16 the decision was made from the trustee's point of view or 17 in consultation with the promoter as to how the surplus 18 would be distributed? 19 A. Sorry, can you just ask that again? 20 21 Q. From your point of view, you've got no knowledge of 22 how the decision was made from the Trustee's point of view, 23 or in consultation with the promoter, as to how the surplus 24 would be distributed? 25 A. I may have been asked about Construction Charitable 26 Works, for the Trustee. 27 28 Q. You may have been? 29 A. Well, I think I was, yes. 30 31 Q. You think you were? 32 A. Thinking back, yes, I think I was. 33 34 Q. Do I take it from that that you were? 35 A. Yes, I was asked about it. 36 37 Q. What were you asked? 38 A. What services it provides. 39 40 Q. What service CCW provides? 41 A. Yes, and - yes. 42 43 Q. Just to remind you, sir, volume 2, I think you have 44 that near you -- 45 A. Yes, I've got volume 2, yes. 46 47 Q. Page 495.


1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Clause 18 is about the "Surplus", which says: 4 5 Upon the closing of each Fund Year any 6 surplus remaining in the Fund for that Fund 7 Year shall be allocated for the benefit of 8 the majority of the current and/or prior 9 year's members of the Fund, at the 10 discretion of Jardine: 11 12 18.1 as a reserve which may be used for 13 liabilities of the Fund or for the 14 liabilities of any future Fund Year; 15 16 18.2 for expenditure on risk management 17 issues relevant to the Fund; or 18 19 18.3 after consultation with the Promoter, 20 for expenditure on issues which are 21 relevant to the Members and/or Member's 22 businesses or which advance the purposes of 23 the Fund generally. 24 25 A. Mmm-hmm. 26 27 Q. So, you agree that you were consulted by the Trust? 28 A. I was asked about Construction Charitable Works, yes, 29 and the services it provides. 30 31 Q. Given that the initial proposal from Mr Carlos was 32 that the money should go to CSI, at what point were you 33 asked about CCW? 34 A. I was asked, I think, at the meeting about CCW. 35 36 Q. Which meeting? 37 A. The meeting that we had in Adelaide. 38 39 Q. That was much later in time, though, wasn't it? 40 A. I don't know. At some particular point I was asked 41 about CCW services, but I can't remember -- 42 43 Q. Just to be clear, the document I showed you starting 44 at 993 where the split of 20/80 was being discussed, that 45 was in April 2014. 46 A. Right. 47


1 Q. The other documents I took you to were concerning the 2 end of 2013. Do you say that you were consulted in 3 relation to 2014 or 2013? 4 A. I was asked about Construction Charitable Works and 5 the services they provide. I told them. 6 7 Q. When? 8 A. I don't exactly know the date. 9 10 Q. I've taken you through those emails where it was 11 suggested by Mr Carlos, using, at least, his CSI email 12 address, that the moneys should initially, it was 13 suggested, go to CSI? 14 A. I don't know why he would have done that. 15 16 Q. And then it was a suggestion by the Trust and 17 apparently the auditor that it should go to a charity and 18 it was only then that it went to CCW. Do you say you were 19 involved in that process, do you? 20 A. No. I don't know the emails between Glenn and - and - 21 but from what I'm seeing there it was - they asked me about 22 Construction Charitable Works, I told them, and the emails 23 from Glenn, I don't know. 24 25 Q. When were you asked in relation to the 2013 26 distribution? 27 A. I can't remember the exact date. I remember talking 28 about Construction Charitable Works and the services it 29 provides. I don't know the dates. 30 31 Q. Can you estimate at least which distribution we're 32 talking about, which surplus we're talking about? 33 A. I wouldn't like to say. I don't - I can't remember. 34 35 Q. We've seen that it appears to have been initiated by 36 the Trust itself that it should go to CCW and in relation 37 to the later one in 2014 at page 995, again, it was 38 suggested apparently by Mr Hall, according to this minute, 39 that the surplus splits would be: JLT 20 per cent; CSI 40 80 per cent. It's not CCW. 41 A. That's JLT's minutes. I don't -- 42 43 Q. Sent to you, though. Do you say they're wrong, do 44 you? 45 A. The wording could be wrong. 46 47 Q. What's your recollection of the discussion which was


1 last year? 2 A. In regards to what part? 3 4 Q. The bit at page 995 where the surplus split was 5 suggested to be JLT 20 per cent and CSI 80 per cent. 6 A. I believe it would be going to CCW. That's what 7 I remember. 8 9 Q. We have seen from yesterday's excursion through the 10 staffing of CSI that Mr Carlos stopped working at CSI. 11 I think it was September 2014; is that right? 12 A. That sounds about right, yes. 13 14 Q. When he left, who was doing what he was doing? Who 15 started to do what he was doing? 16 A. As in what part of his role? 17 18 Q. The promoter related duties. 19 A. I think Jessica Dean from my office. 20 21 Q. What part of the work was taken over by the 22 bookkeepers or whoever it was at Tradies? 23 A. The accounts. 24 25 Q. So Jessica Dean took over the promoter's role, is that 26 what you're saying? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. What part of her role was doing that work and what 30 part of her role was training related admin? 31 A. I think by then we'd had Janice Brennan start with us. 32 So, yes, as in - can you just read out - what do you mean 33 by the question? 34 35 Q. Yesterday I think I put to you that when Mr Carlos 36 retired, his position was not refilled. 37 A. That's right. 38 39 Q. I think I also put to you - and you agreed - that 40 Ms Brennan was hired part-time -- 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. -- three days a week to assist with additional 44 training compliance; do you recall that? You were asked at 45 page 219 of yesterday's transcript, lines 7 and 8: 46 47 Q. She was essentially admin, was it?


1 A. Yes. Reception/admin, yes. 2 3 A. That's in the front part to alleviate that, yes, 4 that's right. 5 6 Q. And I asked you: 7 8 Q. That allowed Dianne Vanderdong to 9 concentrate on data entry? 10 11 And you agreed? 12 A. That's part of her role, yes. 13 14 Q. You didn't say yesterday that Jess Dean was involved 15 in taking over the promoter duties of the Trust? 16 A. Well, I don't believe I was asked. 17 18 Q. I did ask you twice, though, about the staffing of 19 CSI. It didn't occur to you to -- 20 A. I was answering questions that I was asked. 21 22 Q. You need to speak up a bit. 23 A. Oh, sorry, I beg your pardon. Shall I just move that 24 forward? 25 26 Q. Yes, thank you. 27 A. Sorry. 28 29 Q. So you weren't asked. Just to clarify now, if we 30 could, you say that Ms Dean, following 2 September 2014, 31 was doing admin work for training and admin work for CCW 32 and admin work as promoter of the Trust? 33 A. She was doing admin work as a whole, yes. 34 35 Q. What proportion of her time was of those different 36 components? 37 A. I don't know. I don't know. 38 39 Q. Who would know, sir? 40 A. I'd have to ask her. 41 42 Q. You were her boss, weren't you? 43 A. That's right. 44 45 Q. And it was your job, wasn't it, to administer, as CEO, 46 both CCW and CSI? 47 A. That's right.


1 2 Q. We went through that in some detail yesterday about 3 that large management fee being paid from CCW to CSI. 4 A. Mmm-hmm. 5 6 Q. Surely it would be appropriate, from an accountability 7 point of view, for you to know what percentage of each 8 staff member's time, at least in a general sense, was being 9 spent on CCW work - yes? 10 A. Well, generally. 11 12 Q. Can you tell the Commission what percentage of her 13 work was being done on CCW, what percentage on the promoter 14 work, and what percentage on the training work? 15 A. As I sit here now, I'd have to - I just know she was 16 doing those roles. 17 18 Q. Yesterday, you agreed that at the end of 2011 - so 19 that's some time before - Ms Dean's time was spent on 20 training for more than two-thirds of her time. 21 A. That's 2011, you say, two-thirds of the time on 22 training? 23 24 Q. Do you say her role in training decreased, do you? 25 A. Well, I had another staff member come on. 26 27 Q. Who was that? 28 A. Well, I was just talking about Janice Brennan. 29 30 Q. Yes, but she was in the reception/admin role? 31 A. When you look at the admin that I've got across the 32 three ladies, it's not broken up in certain parts, as in, 33 "You do that; you do this". It's done as a whole. 34 35 Q. So you're saying that Mr Carlos' role as promoter was 36 taken over by one person and only part of her time was 37 spent on that role? 38 A. Well, Glenn wasn't the promoter. CSI was the 39 promoter. 40 41 Q. You were also asked yesterday at page 216, lines 33 42 and 34: 43 44 Q. Jess Dean was 100 per cent doing CSI 45 work? 46 A. 2012, I believe so, yes. 47


1 Is that right? 2 A. CSI work as in -- 3 4 Q. Well, that's your answer, sir. I will give you some 5 previous answers to put that answer in context, if you 6 like. Page 216, line 19: 7 8 Q. So you can't say then that they 9 both ... 10 11 I'm just working out who "both" are. I think it was 12 Jess Dean and Carlos: 13 14 Q. So you can't say then that they both 15 needed the same amount of time in terms of 16 their finances? 17 18 Actually, no, I was talking about the two entities CCW and 19 CSI, and you answered, at line 21: 20 21 A. Well, Jess in the admin would do all 22 the invoicing, and so on, for the training 23 part of it, so it was the keeping of the 24 books that Dean Carlos would focus on. 25 26 Q. But the keeping of the books would, at 27 least in part, wouldn't it, involve looking 28 at some original documentation to make sure 29 the books are correct, or not? 30 A. Maybe at end of the month, but during 31 the course of the month Jess and Diane, 32 I think, at that stage were doing the 33 invoicing to the individuals and the 34 participants and so on. 35 36 Q. Jess Dean was 100 per cent doing CSI 37 work? 38 A. 2012, I believe so, yes. 39 40 Is that correct? 41 A. CSI/CCW work. At that particular time I don't think 42 I was breaking down the work. 43 44 Q. "That particular time", you mean yesterday in your 45 evidence? 46 A. Well, that's what it seems, yes. 47


1 Q. I beg your pardon? What did you just say? 2 A. I'm just trying to remember back about the 3 conversation and the answer I was giving at the time. 4 5 Q. Sir, we saw yesterday that from a certain point, 6 I think it was 2012, work was being outsourced to OzHelp? 7 A. Work? 8 9 Q. Sorry, I'll be more fulsome. 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. In relation to CCW, do you recall yesterday that there 13 was discussion in some of the minutes of CCW - we can pull 14 them up if we need to, about OzHelp being brought in 15 because CCW no longer had a counsellor. Do you recall 16 that? 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. And that occurred, I think, in about 2012? 20 A. End of 2012, I think, yes. Some time in 2012, yes. 21 22 Q. You are on the board of OzHelp? 23 A. Yes, I am. 24 25 Q. Deputy Chair, is that right? 26 A. Yes, that's right, at the moment. 27 28 Q. Just for the record, at volume 1, page 387, the 29 minutes appear. It is from the CEO Board Report and it 30 would apparently be in relation to the meeting of actually 31 21 December 2011 - no, that couldn't be right. Anyway, 32 page 387 says: 33 34 As a result of the partnership being signed 35 in February 2012 ... 36 37 A. Sorry, I don't have the minutes in front of me. 38 39 Q. I'm sorry. Volume 1. You saw this yesterday. 40 A. Thank you. What tab would I be on? 41 42 Q. Tab 30, page 387. The footer would indicate that it 43 is the CCW board meeting for December 2011 to March 2012. 44 It would appear to be in relation to the March 2012 45 meeting. We saw this yesterday, under "Employment of 46 social work/health professional: 47


1 As a result of the partnership being signed 2 in February 2012 with OzHelp Foundation, 3 CCW no longer have the requirement to 4 employ a social works/health professional. 5 As part of the agreement held with OzHelp, 6 CCW are now referring all welfare cases to 7 OzHelp for assistance. 8 9 A. Yes. Counselling. 10 11 Q. Counselling. OzHelp have a website, that's right, 12 isn't it? 13 A. I believe so, yes. 14 15 Q. Can I show you these two documents. Do they appear to 16 be print-outs from the OzHelp website? 17 A. Seems to be, yes. 18 19 Q. There's a three-page set: Healthy men at work - 20 Healthy men for life; OzHelp Board. Do you see that? 21 There's a number of people listed, including yourself, and 22 the Deputy Chair? 23 A. That's right. 24 25 Q. You've been involved with that Board for a number of 26 years? 27 A. Yes. I can't - yes, I don't know the exact dates, but 28 yes. 29 30 Q. Certainly from 2012, or was it after that? 31 A. It could be 2012, yes. 32 33 Q. And the other document, the four-page set -- 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. -- under the heading "Support": 37 38 OzHelp is dedicated to proactively 39 supporting men in the workplace in 40 Australia through visits undertaken by 41 trained OzHelp staff members. 42 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. 46 We can arrange to visit you at a time and 47 place that best suits you, for an informal


1 chat and advice about a range of topics 2 related to fostering healthy lifestyle 3 choices for your physical and mental 4 wellbeing. To arrange for a field visit or 5 for more information contact us. 6 7 So it appears to be that they're in the business, in part, 8 of field visits? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. And is it the case that that has been the nature of 12 that organisation for at least as long as you have been 13 involved with them? 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. Does that mean that from 2012, they were taking over 17 the field visits? 18 A. No. 19 20 Q. So what were they doing then? 21 A. They were providing counselling from referrals from 22 CCW. 23 24 Q. And that's all? 25 A. And overseeing my field officers. 26 27 Q. How did that work? 28 A. To give an example from myself, if I went out and did 29 a field visit for CCW and I wanted to check a suicide plan, 30 for instance, I would ring OzHelp and we would run through 31 the plan to ensure that it was sound. 32 33 Q. Any other examples? 34 A. That was generally how it was - how it was done. 35 36 Q. Did you have a record of your contact with OzHelp? 37 A. I may have put it in field notes but other than that, 38 probably not. 39 40 Q. What are field notes? 41 A. On my case files. 42 43 Q. Would OzHelp only be involved when you opened a file 44 for a person? 45 A. They would only be involved when I rang them. 46 47 Q. When you?


1 A. When I would ring them. 2 3 Q. But in relation to people that you'd opened files for? 4 A. No, not necessarily. 5 6 Q. General advice? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. I can't recall, can you remind me, did they charge for 10 their services? 11 A. OzHelp? 12 13 Q. Yes. 14 A. There was a donation made to OzHelp. 15 16 Q. By CCW? 17 A. By the Tradies Group. 18 19 Q. So the Tradies Group donated to OzHelp? 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. OzHelp helped CCW? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. Is that how you understood the arrangement? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. What type of organisation is OzHelp, legally speaking, 29 can you assist the Commission with that? 30 A. I think it's a - it has charitable status, not for 31 profit. 32 33 Q. Is it a registered organisation or a company or -- 34 A. Yes, I believe it's a registered company, yes. 35 36 Q. Are you on the board of directors? 37 A. Yes, I am. 38 39 Q. When you say you believe it's a registered company, 40 your answer is, in fact, "It is definitely a registered 41 company of which I am a director"? 42 A. I believe so. 43 44 MS McNAUGHTON: Could these two bundles of documents be 45 received into evidence? 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. The first, which is the document


1 setting out the OzHelp Board, will be CSI MFI-16 and the 2 second, which is a brochure describing OzHelp's activities, 3 will be CSI MFI-17. 4 5 CSI MFI-16 - DOCUMENT SETTING OUT THE OZHELP BOARD 6 7 CSI MFI-17 - BROCHURE DESCRIBING THE ACTIVITIES OF OZHELP 8 9 MS McNAUGHTON: Commissioner, it is only 20 past, but we 10 have that body of documentation we would like to review. 11 Would it be convenient if we took an early morning tea 12 adjournment? 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: How long would you like? 15 16 MS McNAUGHTON: Could we have until a quarter to 12? 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. The hearing will resume at 11.45. 19 20 SHORT ADJOURNMENT 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms McNaughton? 23 24 MS McNAUGHTON: Commissioner, we have had a brief look at 25 the material produced by CCW in relation to the intake 26 forms. I think we're just waiting for some copies. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Do you want a longer opportunity to 29 look at it? One possibility is to have Mr Borgeest and 30 Mr Agius question on what evidence has been given so far, 31 or anything else they want to ask about, and then perhaps 32 start Mr O'Mara and then, over lunch, you could look at the 33 documents, if you want to, more thoroughly. 34 35 MS McNAUGHTON: We think it would require more time than 36 that. What we might do, if it is convenient, I will ask 37 Mr Jennings about just the blank form and general questions 38 and then if we could have an extended opportunity to look 39 at the material. It may be that we agree with our friend 40 that a very restricted amount of material would be provided 41 into evidence in due course, with no details, or something 42 of that nature, but if we could have time to consider our 43 position. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: I think you are talking about matters 46 of privacy and I am certainly prepared to make a direction 47 about that, but it might be even more prudent to actually


1 blank out the material which is to be kept confidential so 2 that there is no risk of any disclosure. 3 4 MS McNAUGHTON: Indeed. We would like some time to just 5 look at it. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: I am in your hands, really. Do you 8 want to ask some questions about the blank forms now? 9 10 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Right. 13 14 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. If I could have the witness shown 15 this form. 16 A. Thank you. 17 18 Q. Sir, does that appear to be a template of the intake 19 form? 20 A. Yes, it does. 21 22 Q. Has that been in this form for a period of time? 23 A. Yes, it has. 24 25 Q. Perhaps it is easiest to go four pages from the back 26 of that bundle. 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. Do you see that is the privacy and confidentiality 30 portion of the document? 31 A. Yes, I do. 32 33 Q. It says: 34 35 Privacy 36 37 Charitable Construction Works (CCW), as a 38 service of CFMEU, is bound by the Privacy 39 Act 2000. 40 41 And the like. Under the heading two-thirds of the way down 42 the page "CCW Data Collection": 43 44 CCW is required to collect information for 45 the Annual Report to enable the funding 46 bodies to determine how best to provide 47 support to CFMEU members.


1 2 What does all that mean? 3 A. As in the services we provide to clients once they 4 have an intake form. 5 6 Q. You've qualified your answer there, given the 7 information on this form doesn't appear to suggest that. 8 The information on this form appears to suggest that 9 information in general is required to be obtained. You 10 take that as only information where an intake form is 11 required to be obtained? 12 A. On this particular form, yes. 13 14 Q. Do I take it then that anyone who has a face-to-face 15 consultation with someone from CCW is given this form? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. Well, why is that? 19 A. Like I was discussing yesterday, not everyone at the 20 start of our face-to-face contact does an intake. 21 22 Q. But aren't they entitled to know about the privacy 23 considerations? 24 A. Once they enter into us developing a training plan, 25 yes. 26 27 Q. What about privacy considerations of someone who is 28 just talking to you, shouldn't they be aware of what 29 privacy -- 30 A. We don't keep any records. 31 32 Q. Well, the person who is talking to them gets 33 information, that's the position, isn't it? 34 A. We have a discussion with them, yes. 35 36 Q. And you collect information from them, whether 37 original or otherwise; that's right, isn't it? 38 A. We talk to them, yes. 39 40 Q. You say it is not necessary to provide those people 41 with any information about privacy? 42 A. Until they enter into a program formally, we don't 43 retain their information. 44 45 Q. We have been provided with 53 forms from a period of 46 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2014. 47 A. Mmm-hmm.


1 2 Q. That averages out as one person who has had the intake 3 procedure conducted with them per fortnight, that's the 4 average. Would you agree? 5 A. Sounds right, yes, average, yes. 6 7 Q. Is it the position that you see a lot of people or a 8 few people outside of the group of people for whom a form 9 is filled in? 10 A. Depending on the case. 11 12 Q. How many people, or can't you say, contact CCW that 13 don't have an intake form filled out in terms of a 14 welfare-type contact? 15 A. Yes, I wouldn't know the exact numbers. 16 17 Q. You've got no record at all? 18 A. No formal record, no. 19 20 Q. Well, what informal record do you have? 21 A. If I was doing a fatality on a building site, I would 22 be talking to multiple workers, so I don't necessarily have 23 the - I can't do an intake form per person when I'm doing 24 that. 25 26 Q. I'm talking about individuals? 27 A. You want me to make a rough guess or -- 28 29 Q. I don't want you to guess. 30 A. I don't know - I don't know the exact numbers so I -- 31 32 Q. Can you make a reasonable estimate? 33 A. A reasonable estimate. It might be one or two in five 34 that I'd do a form for, maybe. 35 36 Q. Can I take it that of those that you don't do a form 37 for, they are brief contacts? 38 A. I wouldn't say brief. 39 40 Q. Would they be more than an hour or two? 41 A. Could be multiple, multiple meetings with them. 42 43 Q. You could have multiple meetings with an individual 44 and fill out no paperwork at all, is that your honest 45 answer to the Commission? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. For hours and you'd have no record of that at all? 2 A. I could meet with individuals numerous times before 3 they are happy to enter into an intake with us. 4 5 Q. Leaving the intake form procedure aside, do you have 6 any other record for your internal record-keeping purposes 7 to indicate that you have met with that person for hours 8 multiple times? 9 A. Not necessarily, no. 10 11 Q. How about the annual report? Is there an annual 12 report? 13 A. There is an annual report, yes. 14 15 Q. What is the format of that annual report? 16 A. It's the work we've done for the year and some numbers 17 in the back of it. 18 19 Q. What funding body is that provided to? 20 A. The Training Fund Authority. 21 22 Q. Is that the only one? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. Wouldn't the Training Fund Authority be interested in 26 knowing the full gamut of the work that CCW does? 27 A. My understanding is they just want an annual report of 28 what work we've done in the year. 29 30 Q. Yes. Doesn't the work you've done in the year include 31 people that you have had phone contact with? 32 A. They haven't specified exactly what extent of the 33 report they'd like. 34 35 Q. Yesterday I asked you to give a percentage of the 36 people that weren't included in your intake form system and 37 you, first of all, said, "I wouldn't want to say a 38 percentage." Then I asked you at page 223, line 25: 39 40 Well, 90 per cent, 20 per cent, somewhere 41 in between? 42 43 And you said: 44 45 I don't know. 20, 30 per cent, if we're 46 looking for a figure, yes. 47


1 A. Yes, I can't - same as yesterday, I can't give you 2 tangible numbers on that. 3 4 Q. There you say 20 to 30 per cent of people who you 5 don't make records for. Is that the right answer? 6 A. You asked me to give an estimate; I gave an estimate. 7 8 Q. Today you gave a wholly different estimate, 60 to 9 80 per cent of people who don't have a record? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. So is it 20 to 30 or is it 60 to 80? 13 A. Sitting here now, I wouldn't be able to give you the 14 exact number. 15 16 Q. I didn't ask you for the exact figure, sir. Is your 17 estimate 20 to 30 per cent or 60 to 80 per cent - to be 18 clear - of people who don't have an intake form? 19 A. Oh, I suppose - 60 to 80 per cent, I suppose, when 20 I think about it now. 21 22 Q. What made you say 20 to 30 per cent yesterday? 23 A. I was probably - just when you asked me to give a 24 figure, that's what I thought at the time. 25 26 Q. What has changed between yesterday and today? 27 A. I'm just thinking about a - I don't know the exact 28 number because I don't keep records of it. 29 30 Q. Do you think that that's a proper way to run a 31 charity, sir? 32 A. I believe in this particular part of the charity, yes. 33 34 Q. To keep no records at all of 60 to 80 per cent of 35 contact you have with individuals seeking your services, 36 you say that's a proper way to run a charity, do you? 37 A. This part of the charity is - that's - unfortunately, 38 with the clientele I deal with, that's how it is. 39 40 MS McNAUGHTON: Could that form be received into evidence? 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. The pro forma CCW Intake Form 43 will being CSI MFI-18. 44 45 CSI MFI-18 PRO FORMA CCW INTAKE FORM 46 47 MS McNAUGHTON: They are my questions, thank you.


1 2 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Yes, Mr Borgeest? 3 4 <EXAMINATION BY MR BORGEEST: 5 6 MR BORGEEST: Q. Mr Jennings, do you happen to have 7 volume 1 of the bundles with you? 8 A. Do I have it? Hold on a second. I'm just flicking 9 back. Yes, I do. 10 11 Q. Thank you. Could I ask you to please turn to tab 6. 12 A. Tab 6. 13 14 Q. That's the document that you were taken to. 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. This is a document generated by ASQA; is that correct? 18 A. ASQA, that's correct. 19 20 Q. Some questions have been asked about this document 21 previously. The first couple of pages identify CETW as a 22 registered training organisation? 23 A. Correct. 24 25 Q. And identifies that the registration manager is the 26 Australian Skills Quality Authority? 27 A. Correct. 28 29 Q. On the following couple of pages, certain responsible 30 persons, including yourself, are identified as part of the 31 Authority's records? 32 A. That's correct. 33 34 Q. If you go further into the document, so commencing 35 from page 80 -- 36 A. Yes. 37 38 Q. -- there are some tables which commence two-thirds of 39 the way down page 80 and extend on to the following pages 40 and it appears that those - would you agree that those 41 tables identify particular training courses or units of 42 courses? 43 A. Yes, that's units of competence and full 44 qualifications, yes. 45 46 Q. Are we to understand that these are courses that the 47 Authority has some role in confirming or approving your

.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 317 J J JENNINGS (Mr Borgeest) Transcript produced by DTI

1 organisation as being a provider for? 2 A. Correct, yes. 3 4 Q. On page 80 there's a heading "Units of Competency"? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. There is a list of those that carry on into page 81? 8 A. That's right. 9 10 Q. Beneath that there's a single item under 11 "Accredited Courses", on page 81? 12 A. Yes, that's right, yes. 13 14 Q. And that's the Asbestos Awareness Course that the 15 Commission has received some evidence about? 16 A. Yes. The first one is the newer of the accredited 17 courses and the 80803 ACT was a previous Asbestos Awareness 18 Course. 19 20 Q. When you refer to the previous Asbestos Awareness 21 Course is that identified on this page? 22 A. Yes, page 92, in the middle, "Accredited Course 23 history". 24 25 Q. Is that 82? 26 A. 82, yes, sorry. 27 28 Q. That was a course that was conducted by CSI before the 29 Nationally Accredited Course was mandated by the 30 ACT Government; is that right? 31 A. That's correct. 32 33 Q. Back on page 81, the table in the middle that says 34 "Qualifications history" -- 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. -- do we understand that as identifying courses that 38 CSI has been accredited to provide in the past but no 39 longer provides, or is no longer accredited to provide? 40 A. That's correct, yes. 41 42 Q. Both of those things are correct - CSI no longer 43 provides them? 44 A. That's right. 45 46 Q. And is no longer accredited to provide them? 47 A. That's right.


1 2 Q. And the same is the case, is it, with the next table, 3 "Units of competency history"? 4 A. That's correct, yes. 5 6 Q. Going back to page 80, are the units of competency 7 that are accredited through the Authority and the 8 Nationally Accredited Course on page 81, the course in 9 asbestos awareness, are they the only courses that are 10 currently provided by CSI or are there other courses? 11 A. Accredited courses, working safely at heights, the 12 asbestos course, White Card, and there's a range of 13 non-accredited courses that we provide. 14 15 Q. Yes. In the same volume could you please turn forward 16 to tab 18. 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. These are papers for CSI for a Board meeting. I ask 20 you to turn forward to page 249. 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. You recognise this, don't you, as a form of report 24 that you provide as CEO to the Board on a regular basis 25 which informs the Board of the amount of training that's 26 provided in the full range of courses and indicates the 27 variance from expectations from budget? 28 A. That's right. 29 30 Q. The list of courses that you're reporting upon here 31 includes those accredited courses that we were looking at a 32 moment ago and also includes the other courses that are 33 provided outside of the arrangements you have with that 34 authority? 35 A. That's right, yes. 36 37 Q. Just staying on that document, page 249, do you see, 38 at the top, the commentary immediately above the table, 39 that this is a report saying what training was provided 40 during the whole of calendar year 2014? 41 A. That's correct. 42 43 Q. Yes. In the middle of the table there's a reference 44 to "NAT 10314 Course in Asbestos awareness". Do you see 45 that? 46 A. That's correct. 47


1 Q. That is the current nationally accredited course? 2 A. That's correct. 3 4 Q. That's the one that was mandated by the 5 ACT Government? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. You're reporting to the Board there that 4,030 9 participants were trained under that program? 10 A. That's correct. 11 12 Q. And apparently, at the commencement of 2014 or 13 whenever a budget was set, you were operating on an 14 expectation of training about 1,800 persons? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. Would you turn to the next page, please. We're moving 18 from the CEO Report to the CFO Report for that same 19 meeting. Do you agree with that? 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. Could I ask you to look at the commentary underneath 23 the table. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. It is said there by the CFO: 27 28 The total income for the reporting period 29 is well above the budget ... 30 31 And gives some measurements. And the next sentence: 32 33 This is mainly due to the year to date 34 income from Asbestos Safety Training of 35 $907,874. 36 37 A. That's right. 38 39 Q. Is it the case that that figure, the nearly 908,000, 40 is the revenue received by CSI solely attributable to that 41 single national accredited course? 42 A. That seems what it says, yes. 43 44 Q. Does that accord with your recollection of how well 45 that performed? 46 A. Yes, it performed very well. 47


1 Q. Turning back to that extract from your report, the 2 table on the previous page -- 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. -- that's an indication of the courses that were 6 provided during the calendar year 2014? 7 A. That's right, yes. 8 9 Q. Some of the customers of your training business are 10 employers in the building and construction industry? 11 A. Correct, yes. 12 13 Q. And some of the customers of the business are 14 individuals who wish to purchase training on their own 15 account? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. And there's otherwise training provided to apprentices 19 in collaboration with CIT? 20 A. That's correct. 21 22 Q. Of the employer customers, do you have a sense of the 23 proportion of the total training business that is delivered 24 across all of your customers? What proportion come through 25 sponsored by employers; that is, is most, or all, or nearly 26 all of the training participants sponsored by employers, or 27 is there some larger proportion of persons purchasing 28 training on their own account? 29 A. There's a number of clients that are non-construction 30 based, so Parks and City Services, the Action buses in 31 Canberra, AFP. 32 33 Q. The first one was Parks and -- 34 A. Parks and City Services which is an ACT Government 35 department. 36 37 Q. Yes. And the second one was? 38 A. Action Buses. 39 40 Q. That is a private transport company? 41 A. Yes, our local transport company, and they have buses. 42 43 Q. Yes. And the third one? 44 A. AFP. There's councils and others that we do business 45 with, yes. 46 47 Q. Leaving those aside and focusing on employers in the


1 construction industry, of the total number of individuals 2 who receive training in a year, such as 2014, do you have a 3 sense of what proportion of those are sponsored by 4 employers in the construction industry? 5 A. So, paid for on behalf of their employees? 6 7 Q. Yes. 8 A. Yes. Looking at those numbers there and taking away 9 the asbestos, the bulk of our work would be in the CIT with 10 the apprentices, yes. 11 12 Q. The amount of training, the proportion of training 13 that's delivered in an ordinary year, leaving aside the 14 unusual circumstances with the Asbestos Awareness Course, 15 the proportion of training services delivered to 16 individuals who are sponsored and paid for by employers is 17 greater or lesser than 50 per cent of the total training 18 you deliver, to your understanding? 19 A. Probably greater. 20 21 Q. Greater or smaller than 75 per cent? 22 A. Probably in that range, yes. 23 24 Q. In between 50 and 75? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. I see. 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. Of those employers, is it often the case that you only 31 deliver training to an employer on a one-off basis, or do 32 you have repeat customers? 33 A. Yes, we have a client base that is quite substantial 34 over the years of our business, yes. 35 36 Q. So you would say that there are a number of employers 37 in the construction industry who have been having their 38 employees trained by CSI for a number of years 39 consistently? 40 A. Correct, yes. 41 42 Q. For the employers who purchased training services from 43 your organisation in 2014, would you say most of those, or 44 less than half of those, had been training with you for a 45 number of years? 46 A. I'd say at least probably more than half. 47


1 Q. Thank you. Again, in the same volume but turning to a 2 different topic, can I ask you to look at tab 8. 3 A. Tab 8. Yes. 4 5 Q. You have seen that document before, that's the Special 6 Purpose Financial Report for the last financial year 7 ending December 2014. 8 A. That's correct. 9 10 Q. Could you just turn to page 100. 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. That's the Statement of Comprehensive Income for that 14 year. 15 A. That's right, yes. 16 17 Q. Mr Jennings, you were asked some questions yesterday, 18 and it was suggested to you that maybe 50 per cent of CSI's 19 employment related, or labour expenditure, was paid for by 20 the management fee that CSI receives from CCW. Do you 21 remember that? 22 A. I think it was a third. 23 24 MS McNAUGHTON: Commissioner, I don't think that was 25 suggested. 26 27 MR BORGEEST: I'll withdraw that. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: If I can just make this general remark: 30 Mr Jennings has been in the witness box for a day or so. 31 To use an expression I have heard before, he has been asked 32 hundreds of questions. It might be necessary to go to the 33 particular material rather than asking him to try and 34 remember from this great range of different subjects. 35 36 Q. Do you agree with that, Mr Jennings? 37 A. Thank you, Commissioner. 38 39 MR BORGEEST: Yes. It is not necessary for me to go back 40 to that. Thank you. 41 42 Q. This Statement of Comprehensive Income, Mr Jennings, 43 includes an item 4, "Employee Costs", for each of the years 44 2013 and 2014? 45 A. That's correct. 46 47 Q. To your understanding, that includes the cost of wages


1 and a number of other items? 2 A. That's right. 3 4 Q. You would expect that that includes provisions for 5 leave? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. And employees of the organisation are entitled to 9 benefits in the redundancy scheme ACIRT? 10 A. ACIRT, yes. 11 12 Q. And those contributions would come in here under 13 "Employee Costs", is that right? 14 A. That's right, yes. 15 16 Q. There is another employment related cost, isn't there, 17 on the next line for "Superannuation Costs"? 18 A. That's correct, yes. 19 20 Q. Just looking at 2014, you'd agree, wouldn't you, that 21 the total employment costs for CSI are $643,000 plus that 22 $50,000 figure? 23 A. That's correct, yes. 24 25 Q. I won't ask you to do the maths, but the sum of those 26 is something in the order of $695,000? 27 A. That's correct, yes. 28 29 Q. We could do a similar calculation for 2013 for those 30 two items; again, the total is the sum of those two things, 31 which is about $653,000? 32 A. That's correct, yes. 33 34 MR BORGEEST: Thank you. Those are the questions I had 35 for Mr Jennings. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Borgeest. Mr Agius? 38 39 MR AGIUS: We have no questions. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. Ms McNaughton? 42 43 MS McNAUGHTON: There is just one matter. 44 45 46 <EXAMINATION BY MS McNAUGHTON: 47


1 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. You were asked yesterday about gap 2 payments, do you recall that, paid by CCW to CSI? 3 A. Correct. 4 5 Q. Can you explain how they worked? 6 A. How they work? What part? 7 8 Q. Well, are they paid by CCW only to CSI, or are they 9 also paid to any other training organisation that an 10 apprentice might want? 11 A. Only to CSI. 12 13 Q. Only to CSI? 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. Why is that? 17 A. Because that's the payment for the training we do at 18 the CIT. 19 20 Q. So, it is only for training that an apprentice does 21 through CSI at CIT? 22 A. The work that we do, that is the payment to CSI for 23 the work at the CIT. 24 25 Q. What if an apprentice wishes to do a course at another 26 training institution or through another training 27 institution? 28 A. I would have to take that to the Board. 29 30 Q. Has that ever occurred? 31 A. Not to my knowledge. 32 33 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes. They are my questions. 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: Is it in order for Mr Jennings to be 36 excused? 37 38 MS McNAUGHTON: We would like him not to be excused 39 because of that body of material we would like to have a 40 look at first. 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: I am just a little concerned about his 43 personal convenience. 44 45 MS McNAUGHTON: Certainly for this week's purposes. 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: He lives in Canberra.


1 2 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Would you be returning to the topic 5 today or some later occasion? 6 7 MS McNAUGHTON: We may not even need to in fact have him 8 back. We just don't know at this stage. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Mr Jennings, you have heard what 11 Ms McNaughton has said. It will not be possible to excuse 12 you from further attendance at this stage but if it is 13 necessary, you will be communicated with and some 14 convenient date will be worked out. You can leave the 15 witness box now. Thank you very much for waiting and for 16 giving the time you have given to testifying. 17 A. Thank you. 18 19 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr O'Mara? 22 23 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes, I call Jason O'Mara. 24 25 <JASON LAWRENCE O'MARA, sworn: [12.20pm] 26 27 <EXAMINATION BY MS McNAUGHTON: 28 29 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. Sir, could you please tell the 30 Commission your full name? 31 A. Jason Lawrence O'Mara. 32 33 Q. Your occupation? 34 A. Assistant Secretary of the ACT Branch of the CFMEU. 35 36 Q. People on your behalf have been kind enough to provide 37 the Commission with a professional resume. Can I show you 38 this one-page document. 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. Have you seen that document before? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Is that something that has been prepared by you or by 45 someone on your behalf? 46 A. It was prepared on my behalf from someone in the 47 office, from information that I'd given to them.

.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 326 J L O'MARA (Ms McNaughton) Transcript produced by DTI

1 2 Q. You have checked it and satisfied yourself as to its 3 correctness? 4 A. Yes. There's some gap between when I left school to 5 when I moved into the construction industry, but apart from 6 that, it's accurate. 7 8 MS McNAUGHTON: If that could be received into evidence, 9 please. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr O'Mara's professional resume will be 12 CSI MFI-19. 13 14 CSI MFI-19 - PROFESSIONAL RESUME OF JASON LAWRENCE O'MARA 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. What did you do between school and 17 starting in the construction industry, Mr O'Mara? 18 A. I went to university for a couple of years and studied 19 economics. After a couple of years, I decided that wasn't 20 for me so I took a couple of years off, done some 21 travelling, come back and started working in the 22 construction industry. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: Good. Thank you. 25 26 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. You have been sitting here, I think, 27 since Tuesday morning? 28 A. I certainly have. 29 30 Q. Therefore, you would have heard all of the evidence of 31 Mr Hall and Mr Jennings? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. Have you been able to see, from where you were 35 sitting, any of the documents that have been received into 36 evidence, for example, MFI-1? 37 A. I've seen a lot - yes, I've seen the chart, yes, on 38 the screen and that, yes. 39 40 Q. Could we just have that made available to the witness, 41 thank you? 42 A. I think I might have it left over. 43 44 Q. Have you got that? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Thank you. You appear, to a large extent, in relation


1 to a lot of these organisations or entities on this 2 document? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. And you have, I think, listed them on your 6 professional resume as well. Can you just give an outline 7 to the Commission of when your corporate responsibilities 8 started? 9 A. With the - I was a Board member of the Woden 10 Tradesmen's Union Club from late 2009, I believe. 11 12 Q. We've got your date, according to the ASIC form, as 13 18 January 2010. Does that sound right? 14 A. Is that Woden, is it? I thought it was a little bit 15 earlier than that, but that's possibly correct. 16 17 Q. In fact, that 18 January 2010 date seems to be a 18 reasonably significant date in that you and your 19 colleagues, at least in some respects, became directors of 20 a number of different entities on that day. For example, 21 if you go down to the Canberra Tradesmen's Union Club 22 Community Fund Limited, do you see the right hand gold box? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. There's a number of you and your colleagues that came 26 on to the Board on that particular date? 27 A. Yes. That's when I became Acting Assistant Secretary 28 of the Branch. 29 30 Q. Becoming Acting Assistant Secretary of the CFMEU 31 automatically meant that you became a Board member of these 32 other entities as well, did it? 33 A. No, there was some - there was a resignation of the 34 current Secretary and some people moved around positions in 35 the organisation, so some of these positions became 36 available and I fitted the bill as far as most of the 37 constitutions. 38 39 Q. Just to run through them, you became a director of the 40 Woden Tradesmen's Union Club on that 18 January 2010 date? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. And also the Canberra Tradesmen's Union Club Limited 44 on that date? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. And also, as I've just asked you about, the Canberra


1 Tradesmen's Union Club Community Fund Limited on that same 2 date? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. On a slightly later date, you became a director of 6 Construction Charitable Works Limited. Can you see down 7 the bottom there, you were a director between 23 March 2010 8 and 28 June 2013? 9 A. I'm sorry -- 10 11 Q. That's the bottom of the box in the bottom right-hand 12 corner? 13 A. Construction Charitable Works, yes. 14 15 Q. Your name is in blue on each occasion. 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. How did it come about that you became a director of 19 that entity? 20 A. It was one of the ones where there was a position left 21 available when, I think, Sarah Schoonwater had resigned and 22 so -- 23 24 Q. She resigned on 18 January, as she did a lot of other 25 entities, I think. 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. But you took until March in relation to that 29 particular entity? 30 A. Yes. Look, I would imagine that would be probably 31 lodgment issues from the company secretaries. 32 33 Q. Why did you leave on 28 June 2013? 34 A. Oh, look, that was when we tried to diversify the 35 Board. I've got a lot on in my role. We had, you know, 36 our Secretary as Chair of all them Boards, so we believed 37 that the CFMEU was adequately represented. I moved aside 38 to concentrate on what I was doing with the Union on a 39 couple of Boards. I believe at that time the discussion 40 was made to do the same thing with CETW but that didn't 41 occur until a year later, and I think that was through - 42 yes, the company secretary didn't get the paperwork done at 43 the right time. 44 45 Q. Just to stay with Construction Charitable Works for a 46 moment, on 28 June 2013, not only you resigned from the 47 Board but also Trevor Scott, Robert Docker, Rod Driver and


1 Stephen Brennan. Does that accord with your recollection? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. He remained as Secretary, though, that is Mr Brennan? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. Then Mr Carrick and Mr Abraham came on on that very 8 date, and who were they? 9 A. Mr Carrick is a solicitor and Mr Abraham, I believe, 10 is an accountant in Canberra. 11 12 Q. Did you know those men before that? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. How did you know those men? 16 A. Martin's involved with the law firm that the Union 17 uses and -- 18 19 Q. Sorry, Martin? 20 A. Martin Carrick - sorry, William Carrick. 21 22 Q. Right. 23 A. Yes, sorry. 24 25 Q. Is that the same person? 26 A. The same person, yes, Mr Carrick, sorry. 27 28 Q. He had been a Union solicitor, had he? 29 A. He worked for Slater & Gordon, yes. 30 31 Q. In relation to CETW, you came on the Board at its 32 inception, it would appear to be, on 29 July 2010? 33 A. Yes, correct. 34 35 Q. Why did you resign on 3 March 2014? 36 A. For the same reason. We were - I was trying to 37 concentrate on my role in the operations of the Union. I 38 was on a number of other Boards as well. So, when I first 39 took up the position of Assistant Secretary and there were 40 all these roles that needed to be filled, I took them on, 41 but as things changed and time moved on, we decided to try 42 and reduce some workload. 43 44 Q. You will recall that I asked Mr Jennings as to whether 45 or not the resignation had anything to do with the 46 announcement of this Royal Commission. Can I ask you the 47 same question: did it?


1 A. Yes, no, nothing to do with it. 2 3 Q. At all? 4 A. At all. 5 6 Q. Moving across the page back in time, you also became a 7 director of Creative Safety Initiatives Pty Ltd on 8 18 January 2010? 9 A. That's correct. 10 11 Q. And you ceased that role on 23 March 2012? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. Why did you cease your role on that date, the same day 15 Mr Hall ceased, apparently. 16 A. I'm not sure about that one. Similar reasons. There 17 were a few that we were trying to transform and add other 18 people. I think they were changing the direction of the 19 old company into the new company and through that period I 20 was getting off the Board. 21 22 Q. What's your understanding of why the legal structure 23 was changed from a straight company arrangement to a 24 trustee company as trustee for a Trust? 25 A. Well, from what I understand, it was a better 26 arrangement to maximise the benefits for our members 27 through the company trusts structure, but I'm not -- 28 29 Q. Why? 30 A. Why? 31 32 Q. Yes. 33 A. I'm not sure. When we -- 34 35 Q. Well, why would it maximise the benefits? 36 A. Sorry, yes, yes, yes, sorry. When we first came on 37 these Boards there was a change in structure. There was a 38 change in membership of the Boards. We jumped into our 39 roles. We looked at how things had been done. There was 40 some advice given to us from the Company Secretary or the 41 accountant of the Group that this structure may be more 42 beneficial, so we took the advice and said if that's going 43 to be better for our members, let's do it that way. 44 45 Q. What do you mean by the Group? 46 A. The Group? 47


1 Q. You said the accountant for the Group. 2 A. Stephen Brennan is the company Secretary for a lot of 3 these entities, so I'm referring to Stephen Brennan. 4 5 Q. But you said: 6 7 There was some advice given to us by the 8 company Secretary or the accountant of the 9 Group. 10 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. Did you view all of these entities on MFI-1 as a 14 group? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. In what sense are they a group? 18 A. Well, they're all companies that have been started 19 either by the Union or by the clubs, all the objectives of 20 the companies are the same, is to benefit our members, you 21 know, their families and the communities that we live in, 22 so yes, there was never any suggestion of any of us 23 thinking that all these companies weren't, you know, all 24 for the benefit of our members. 25 26 Q. By "the benefit of our members", to be clear, do you 27 mean the members of the CFMEU ACT? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. I think you have been named by your colleagues as the 31 EBA man? 32 A. Yes, that's me. 33 34 Q. Is that fair? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Can you assist the Commission, when did you start to 38 become involved with EBAs? 39 A. I started as an organiser with the Branch I think in 40 around March 2007 and I pretty much was involved right from 41 then. 42 43 Q. Did you do any training, informal or formal, to bring 44 you up to speed on how EBAs worked? 45 A. Oh, yes, probably more so informal training with 46 experienced organisers in the EBA department. 47


1 Q. Of the ACT CFMEU? 2 A. Of the ACT CFMEU. I did go - I did go to a course in 3 Sydney at Unions NSW, I believe, early in, or in mid-2007, 4 about EBAs. It was attended by myself and members of other 5 unions. 6 7 Q. Who was that run by? 8 A. Unions NSW. 9 10 Q. How long was that course? 11 A. Oh, three or four days, two or three days, I'm not 12 sure. It was -- 13 14 Q. It was a detailed course? 15 A. It was a detailed course, yes. 16 17 Q. Who gave you the lectures; a number of different 18 people or one person? 19 A. Look, you'd be pushing me now to give that accurate 20 detail. I could find out but I wouldn't know. 21 22 Q. Did you do any further training for the situation of 23 the Fair Work Act coming into operation? 24 A. I'm just trying to recall. I don't think we did any 25 formal training but we had some briefings with our in-house 26 lawyers and the EBA department to work out what had to 27 happen and what the requirements were. 28 29 Q. What do you mean by the EBA department? 30 A. Oh look, we have - there's a - it differs - everyone's 31 in a same department. Everyone works for the Union but 32 we've got a solicitor in-house and there's some admin 33 people that help us with the lodgment and preparation of 34 the agreements, so the organiser goes out, you know, with a 35 draft document, holds the meetings with the employers and 36 the workers. You know, they go about - generally, if 37 there's any changes to a document they'll run it past me 38 and then I'll agree or disagree, you know, with what the 39 changes have been asked for. And then once it gets to a 40 stage of - it's usually handled by the organisers and 41 myself and Garry Hamilton, who's our in-house - it's 42 changed over time. It's handled by them and then once it's 43 time for lodgment, there's a process we go through to get 44 the document lodged, make sure the appropriate meetings 45 have been held, make sure that all the information is true 46 and correct before we lodge the document. 47


1 Q. You say the organiser goes out with a draft document, 2 holds meetings with the employers and the workers, I think 3 you said? 4 A. Yes, the employees, the workers, yes. 5 6 Q. Yes? The employees? A draft document the organiser 7 has in his or her hand - I think "his" in the case of the 8 ACT CFMEU? 9 A. "His", yes. 10 11 Q. How did that draft document come into being? 12 A. Well, I sit down with, you know, people in the office. 13 We talk to workers when it's coming up and get, you know, a 14 log of claims and a log of issues and work out - generally, 15 we do a draft in - we go - it might last for three or four 16 years until that round of EBAs is done. At the start of 17 the period we'll come up with a document and then -- 18 19 Q. You say, "At the start of the period we'll come up 20 with a document" -- 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: I am not sure Mr O'Mara had quite 23 finished his answer to the question. 24 25 Q. Had you finished? 26 A. Yes. So there's - when I refer to the EBA department 27 I'm referring to the solicitor. There may be, you know, 28 another administration person, you know, a legal officer, 29 or there's a number of roles there that help make up that, 30 and we will sit down and we will, you know, take advice, 31 hopefully, from the wording of the document and when we try 32 and work out what clauses are in there, we try and input 33 what direction we've been given from the workers in town. 34 35 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. When was the first EBA that you had 36 anything to do with? 37 A. It would have probably been the scaffold sector EBA in 38 2007. 39 40 Q. Could we take that as an example so we can set the 41 scene and then we'll move on through time? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. You were at that time in what role at the Union? 45 A. I was a Union organiser. 46 47 Q. Who was the equivalent of you then?


1 A. Sarah Schoonwater. 2 3 Q. She was the -- 4 A. She was the Assistant Secretary at the time I was 5 employed. 6 7 Q. Was she in charge of EBAs back then? 8 A. I was. 9 10 Q. You were even then? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. How did that come about? 14 A. Oh, look, I guess I'd had some experience in the 15 industry. Some of the other organisers who had been there 16 hadn't had as much exposure to EBAs. They may have thought 17 I was competent and capable to do it, so I took on that 18 role. 19 20 Q. Where did that experience in the industry in relation 21 to EBAs come from? 22 A. I'd worked for companies over numerous years who had - 23 I mean, I'd been a delegate on jobs and been through the 24 process and knew all about the - you know, knew about the 25 bargaining process, so -- 26 27 Q. You initially sat as a construction worker -- 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. -- listed, if I can use the term not disrespectfully, 31 as an ordinary worker? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. And then you became a delegate at some point? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. When was that? 38 A. In around probably 2000, maybe 2001. 39 40 Q. And a delegate - just to be clear - for the CFMEU ACT? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. In that role you started as a negotiator, did you, on 44 behalf of workers? 45 A. On behalf of my fellow workers, yes. 46 47 Q. Did you get any assistance back in 2000?


1 A. Yes, there'd always be an organiser with you in those 2 processes, yes. 3 4 Q. Back in 2000, can you recall who it was? 5 A. Generally - Les Lanser was generally the organiser 6 I dealt with. Wayne Wilson. It depended on where your job 7 was what organiser would look after you. 8 9 Q. Did those people come out with draft EBAs? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. And you spoke to your fellow workers about them? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. Back in 2000, how did that work? 16 A. Similar to what we do now - you go out and you -- 17 18 Q. Can you explain in some detail as to how that works? 19 A. There are different ways that it happens. If it's a 20 single company who's negotiating, you'll just deal with 21 their workers and the employer and you'll go through the 22 process. 23 24 Q. It's just that we don't know what you mean when you 25 say things like "go through the process"? 26 A. Okay. 27 28 Q. Let's take a single company, as you've just said, and 29 we'll take one thing at a time. 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. A single company. 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. And you're no longer on-site as a worker, you're no 36 longer a delegate -- 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. -- because you work out of the office now as 40 Assistant Secretary? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. So there's a delegate, is there, on-site, of a single 44 company? 45 A. Generally there is, yes. 46 47 Q. It comes up to a new round of EBA negotiations?


1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Literally, what happens? Do you go out to the single 4 company's site or sites with a draft EBA? 5 A. Yes. Yes, the organiser would who is in charge. 6 7 Q. The organiser would. The organiser would have a draft 8 EBA in his hand provided to him by you? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. You would have typed, or ask someone to type that up, 12 for that single employer? 13 A. At the initial stage it would be a generic draft of an 14 agreement. If it was the first time the company had 15 undertaken one of them, you probably wouldn't have rates, 16 you'd just have some basic clauses in and then you'd go and 17 start the negotiating process from there. 18 19 Q. When you say "basic clauses", what type of basic 20 clauses are you talking about? 21 A. Well, at the moment we have an agreement and it has 52 22 clauses in it and that's our - that's - that's our standard 23 agreement which we like, you know, we think it's a good 24 deal for workers in Canberra. We talk to them. We take 25 them through the agreement. We see if they agree with us. 26 If they do, we go and try and get that agreement put into 27 place. We may change some clauses here or there depending 28 on the company that we're dealing with requirements, the 29 operational requirements of their business, but yes, we try 30 and keep, you know, the draft as similar as we can. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms McNaughton, I think we will adjourn 33 now until 2.15. 34 35 MS McNAUGHTON: Thank you. 36 37 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT 38 39 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms McNaughton. 40 41 MS McNAUGHTON: Q. Mr O'Mara, before the lunch break you 42 were telling us that there were three different - if 43 I recall correctly - basic scenarios in terms of what you 44 did for negotiating an EBA and you mentioned a single 45 employer? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. What were the other two? 2 A. Look, it's generally a single employer. There might 3 be a group of employers in a sector that we're trying to 4 get agreements with; I think that's probably basically it. 5 6 Q. And when you deal with that sector situation, do you 7 deal with the employers in particular sectors individually 8 or collectively? 9 A. It depends. It depends. It's timely for us to try 10 and do it collectively because, you know, there's a lot of 11 negotiations goes on, so there's hours and hours of 12 discussions, so if we're doing that, you know, until you 13 get to a certain point with, you know, individual 14 companies, you'd never get around them, so we like to get 15 them all together and get the main part done and then we 16 sort of separate at the end to, you know, have any tweaking 17 of the agreement that we need to do to suit the individual 18 companies. 19 20 Q. Could the witness please be shown volume 4 of MFI-3. 21 Could you please turn to tab 68. You may or may not have 22 seen these before, but included in the material before this 23 hearing are four examples of EBAs in the ACT. Have you had 24 a look at those before? 25 A. Yes, I'm aware of the first two. Yes, yes, I'm aware 26 of them. 27 28 Q. You would have heard over the last couple of days my 29 questions about three clauses in particular, the training 30 clause, if I can call it that? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. The CCW $1 a week clause? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. And also the Built-Plus clause? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. They're all contained in that standard EBA you were 40 talking about? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. First, could I ask you in relation to the training 44 clause, which defines the Approved Training Authority to be 45 CETW as Trustee for CSI? 46 A. Sorry. So it's in the "Definitions" section? 47


1 Q. Yes. I'm assuming you're familiar with it. 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. For example, at 1298 we've got the "Definitions", 3.1? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. 8 "Approved Training Authority" means 9 Construction Employment Training Welfare 10 Ltd as trustee for Creative Safety 11 Initiative (CSI) ... 12 13 And then over to page 1314. 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. Clause 28.2 in this document: 17 18 It is agreed that a training program will 19 be developed and delivered by the 20 Approved Training Authority. 21 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. In your view is there any conflict of interest, so far 25 as your role is concerned in negotiating the EBA, in 26 relation to this clause? 27 A. I don't believe so. 28 29 Q. You understand what I mean by "conflict of interest"? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. And you don't believe there's any conflict of interest 33 in your role as a person negotiating on behalf of workers 34 and also an official of the Union? 35 A. No. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: If you want to be technical about it, 38 I suppose it's a conflict between the duty to the workers 39 and possibly a duty to the Union because the Union official 40 may well owe a fiduciary duty to the Union as an entity, or 41 maybe it's a piece of self-interest if you treat the 42 official as being, essentially, part of the Union. I think 43 probably Mr O'Mara isn't in any doubt about this, but maybe 44 what the possible conflicts are need to be delineated. 45 46 MS McNAUGHTON: Yes. 47


1 Q. Did you understand, in relation to a suggestion of 2 whether or not you see there's a conflict of interest, on 3 the one hand, you're representing the workers to get the 4 best deal that they can have? 5 A. Yes, which we do. 6 7 Q. On the other hand, you are an official of the CFMEU? 8 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. And the CFMEU - as we've seen - is the sole 11 beneficiary of the Trust? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. The CETW CSI Trust? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. You don't see any conflict of interest in that regard? 18 A. Could I explain this clause and what it does and what 19 it sets out to achieve? 20 21 Q. Yes. 22 A. Because I think we're getting fixated on one part of 23 the clause. The clause is designed to have a plan, a 24 training plan developed for workers so that they can move 25 through levels and so that they can get trained up and 26 achieve better stuff. It goes all through all these steps 27 about what happens. The clause doesn't actually - 28 you know, it says a training plan is developed and 29 delivered by the - it talks about developing a training 30 plan for workers. At the end of the clause it talks about 31 a White Card which has been in there for a long time. 32 You know, 98 per cent of people in the industry now has 33 White Cards. This was left in our agreement from a few 34 agreements ago when White Cards weren't compulsory. They 35 were compulsory outside of the ACT but not in the ACT, so 36 there is no general induction card in the ACT, which is 37 what that White Card is. 38 39 We believed it was better for our members, or for 40 workers in Canberra in general, to have a general induction 41 card before they went on-site and that was where this 42 clause came from and it's an historical - it has been left 43 in there from two or three agreements ago. I don't think 44 there's a conflict in us trying to have workers better 45 prepared to enter the industry. 46 47 Q. What I'm interested in is 28.2 which says:


1 2 It is agreed that a training program will 3 be developed and delivered by the Approved 4 Training Authority. 5 6 Which is defined, as we've had a look, as CSI, essentially. 7 A. Yes, and that goes back to the issue of having 8 appropriate training done. We did have a lot of issues in 9 Canberra with people kicking and flicking training and not 10 training people as they were supposed to and so - I did 11 hear Mr Hall's evidence yesterday where he explained how 12 the situation arose and why we took this step in our 13 agreements to try and make sure people were appropriately 14 trained. 15 16 Q. It is one thing to have people appropriately trained. 17 It is another thing to require them to use a particular 18 training organisation which has financial benefits flowing 19 through to the Union. That's the issue I'm asking you 20 about. 21 A. Yes, but our members - we go, we have a vote, the 22 members get the agreement, they get the opportunity to vote 23 on the agreement. Our members like being trained by the 24 Union training organisation. It's certainly not a conflict 25 for them to - it discusses training and gives them a plan 26 to move forward in the industry and they have a choice when 27 we vote every agreement. If they don't like it they 28 wouldn't have it and we would vary the clause. 29 30 Q. Do you explain to people that there is a financial 31 benefit flowing through from CSI to the CFMEU? 32 A. We don't directly explain the company set-up and how 33 it goes, but Canberra is a small place, everyone knows the 34 CFMEU, everyone knows the training organisation, everyone 35 knows - it's not a secret in the industry. 36 37 Q. That there is a financial benefit flowing through from 38 CSI to CFMEU? 39 A. No, it's not. 40 41 Q. It's not a secret? 42 A. No, I don't think so, no. 43 44 Q. It's well known, is it? 45 A. I would suggest so, yes. 46 47 Q. You of course were not only, relevantly, an official


1 of the CFMEU, but you were also, between 2010 and 2014, a 2 director of CETW which is the trustee company for CSI? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. You've got fiduciary duties in relation to that 6 company? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. And to the workers as a representative of them and as 10 an employee of the CFMEU? 11 A. Yes. Everything we do - our object is everything we 12 do is to do the best we can for our members, their families 13 and the communities that we live in; that's the object of 14 all of these things and I believe we do that. 15 16 Q. Can I ask you the same question in relation to the 17 clause relating to CCW. Behind tab A, if you go to 18 clauses 16.4 and 16.5 at page 1305. 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. 22 Employees agree to donate $1.00 per week 23 from the Companies ACIRT contributions as 24 detailed in Clause 1.4 to Construction 25 Charitable Works ... a construction charity 26 set up to provide welfare services which is 27 determined to improve the lives of building 28 workers and their families during a time of 29 need. 30 31 16.5: 32 33 The Employee authorises that Company to 34 donate $1.00 per week ... to Construction 35 Charitable Works ... 36 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. You have heard evidence over the last few days in 40 relation to the management fee paid from CCW to CSI? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. And also that it pays a gap payment to CSI? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. Do you see there's any conflict of interest in any of 47 your roles in relation to CCW, CETW, the CFMEU and your


1 obligations to workers? 2 A. No, I think we fulfil our obligations to workers very 3 well. 4 5 Q. The fact that, for example, CSI sets the price of 6 training, presumably -- 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. -- and CCW pays a gap between what the government 10 rebate is and the price set by CSI, you don't see that 11 there's any potential conflict there? 12 A. That's how the Training Fund Authority works. They 13 don't - they don't pay for the whole price of training, 14 they pay a requirement to Paying the Gap. 15 16 Q. But the price of training, relevantly, is set by CETW 17 as Trustee for CSI and you're a director of the 18 organisation and you're a director of the organisation 19 paying the gap as well? 20 A. Sorry, I'm no longer -- 21 22 Q. No, you were - you were -- 23 A. -- but I was, yes.. 24 25 Q. To be accurate, you were between 23 March 2010 and 26 28 June 2013? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. No conflict of interest, you see? 30 A. I don't believe so. 31 32 Q. Are you of the opinion that the management fee paid by 33 CCW to CSI was inflated? 34 A. Well, that would be hard for me to, you know, talk 35 about because I haven't been on the Board of that 36 organisation for almost 10 years. 37 38 Q. When you were a director, do you believe it was 39 inflated? 40 A. When I was, no. No, I don't believe it was. 41 42 Q. Did you make any inquiries as to what was done in 43 order to earn that fee, that management fee? 44 A. Not directly. I did - sorry, I did see the fantastic 45 work that organisation did in the industry. I regularly 46 fielded calls from members who needed help and passed on 47 the information. I knew how much work, and I saw the lives


1 that were affected and the lives this organisation was 2 saving, so, you know, I couldn't see that any management 3 fee would be too much for the work that organisation did. 4 We're extremely proud of what that organisation does. 5 6 Q. Are you saying by that that it didn't concern you, it 7 could have been any management fee and you would have 8 thought that was terrific? 9 A. No. That was an operational decision made inside the 10 company, but there was nothing that was brought to my 11 attention that would have me believe that they were not 12 fair figures. 13 14 Q. I think you said any management fee -- 15 A. I was probably letting my passion for that 16 organisation get in the road of what I was saying there, 17 when I was trying to get across what an important and 18 pivotal role that company plays in the industry. So, no, 19 I don't think that the management fee that was charged was 20 excessive. 21 22 Q. If I may come to the Built-Plus clause. In this tab A 23 EBA, it is at clause 37, and that is at page 1318. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. In this version of the EBA, it says: 27 28 The terms, conditions and benefits provided 29 by the agreed insurance policy must be 30 equal or better than that provided by 31 BUILT-PLUS. 32 33 In practice, was it your experience that employers, if they 34 did sign up to the EBA, did sign up to Built-Plus? 35 A. Generally they were required to sign up to an income 36 protection - as the clause read, most people were happy to 37 have income protection. It was negotiated in their 38 agreements, and a lot of them used the product. 39 40 Q. My question was: in your experience, did they sign up 41 to the Built-Plus scheme? 42 A. Some of them, yes, not a high majority of them. 43 44 Q. Were you involved in the evolving negotiation in 45 relation to Built-Plus? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. Initially it was a traditional insurance policy? 2 A. Yes, for a short time. 3 4 Q. And then the numbers built up, such that a 5 discretionary policy was negotiated? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. What was the reasoning behind wanting to have a 9 discretionary policy? 10 A. The reasoning behind that was that there is - we had 11 previously had members who had - there was a small section 12 of our industry who had income protection policies. None 13 of the products were as good. There was also a lot of 14 times that people would be caught out by a technicality 15 of - and not be insured, so we didn't feel it was 16 appropriate to enter into them schemes. We liked the idea 17 that the company had the discretion to provide the income 18 protection, and we thought that by way of our - while we 19 didn't have direct input into what they could do, we were 20 signing a lot of agreements which added a lot of people 21 into the scheme and it would be an option for us at the end 22 of the period, if members weren't seeing the appropriate 23 benefits, that we would be able to look to go to a 24 different scheme and so, by my way of thinking, it would 25 keep the income provider honest and make sure that our 26 members got the benefits if they were actually - when they 27 were required. 28 29 Q. Whilst, on the one hand, it gives the discretion to 30 pay when perhaps traditional policies wouldn't pay, there 31 is another side of that coin, isn't there -- 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. -- that they're not obliged to pay? 35 A. Yes, and that's where I was explaining that because 36 there was a lot of companies in the ACT using that policy, 37 if they began not paying out to our members, and they 38 weren't doing the right thing by the policy, I believe that 39 we could have then gone to a different provider. So, 40 I thought that the onus was on them to do the right thing 41 by our members. 42 43 Q. There's been some evidence that before Built-Plus was 44 determined to be the scheme, there were also inquiries made 45 with Coverforce and Windsor? 46 A. That's correct. 47


1 Q. Can you tell the Commission why Built-Plus was chosen 2 over Coverforce and Windsor? 3 A. For me? Because of the discretionary nature, because 4 I thought that we had a better chance - it was a terrific 5 product. It had very few exclusions for our members. 6 After-hours cover generally never covered illness. This 7 one provided for illness; not just an injury. It was 8 extremely competitively priced. People had been out into 9 the market and people - when we were talking about this 10 product and showed them what it was about, you know, were 11 paying $80 or $90 a week individually, so we believed, with 12 the way it was set up, it could also help cap prices. 13 14 It was the first time we'd had the product in in 15 Canberra and we needed to have a product that was 16 competitive. It was cheap and it was also available to be 17 negotiated into the agreements because if there was a 18 product that was - it didn't matter - if the price wasn't 19 acceptable to the employers, it was never going anywhere. 20 So, they were all taken into consideration when we went 21 with JLT. 22 23 Q. Did you make inquiries as to other potential policies 24 which offered top up insurance cover? 25 A. Not particularly. Top up cover in Canberra is not a 26 really big thing. We have a good workers' comp policy in 27 Canberra which is probably the envy of most other States 28 and Territories in the country. So, top up cover is not a 29 real issue for us. 30 31 Q. Is that why you didn't have it included in the Silver 32 and Bronze levels? 33 A. Yes. There was - there is - some people have very 34 extensive cover currently in the industry. That Gold 35 product was to be targeted to them. If they wanted that, 36 it obviously cost more, and it wasn't - the way the 37 workers' comp policy in the ACT was set up, you were nearly 38 covered anyway for most long-term injuries, so -- 39 40 Q. Has that changed recently? 41 A. No. 42 43 Q. Why is it now that the Bronze and Silver insurance 44 does cover top up insurance now? 45 A. Sorry, I'm not sure. I didn't realise it did. 46 47 Q. Do you say that the entry into the Built-Plus scheme


1 had nothing to do with the fact that a surplus was 2 available to be paid, if there was such a surplus, to 3 begin? 4 A. No, no, that's - you know, as I said, this was 5 something that we believed we needed to do, our members 6 wanted it, and we went out and tried to achieve the best 7 product we could, and I think we done that. 8 9 Q. And it had nothing to do with the fact that there 10 would be more money, if there was a surplus available, to 11 be paid to CCW or CSI? 12 A. The way I thought the Trust worked was that there 13 would be more money available for the trustee to put things 14 back into the scheme to keep the prices down and to provide 15 worker training and welfare services, which is what 16 I thought the Trust Deed says; I think it does say. 17 18 Q. Were you not aware that the surplus could be paid as 19 it was, that there was about 70 or 80 per cent in various 20 years being paid across to - well, originally it was going 21 to be CSI and then it was paid to CCW, apparently? 22 A. Yes. Well, I've been here and seen that evidence 23 today, yes. 24 25 Q. Do you say that you were not aware of that inequality? 26 A. I was aware that there was - there was a Trust Deed 27 and part of the idea of having that set up was so that, you 28 know, we could - them things could happen. You know, the 29 prices of the income protection haven't gone up basically 30 since the inception of the scheme. I think the Trust Deed 31 was doing what it was supposed to do. You know, we still 32 have a very competitive product which is really good for 33 our members, and that was what we were trying to do when it 34 was designed. 35 36 Q. Was it explained to members that there was this 37 possibility of surplus being paid out at the instigation of 38 the trustee in consultation, perhaps, with the promoter who 39 was CSI? 40 A. We were empowered to do the best things for our 41 members and we got them a product that worked for them, and 42 part of that was having the ability for the trustee to 43 place money in different places, so we could keep the 44 scheme competitive. 45 46 Q. Did you, as part of your investigations, look at the 47 Cbus income protection portfolio?


1 A. Briefly we did, yes. 2 3 Q. What did you think about the value for money of that? 4 A. I didn't think it was value for money for what we 5 could get. I believe it's just gone - the premiums that 6 they now provide have gone through the roof. I think 7 they've gone up 180 per cent. Don't quote me on the 8 figures, but it's - it wasn't the same sort of cover that 9 we were after. 10 11 Q. What about around about 2012? 12 A. Yes, no, it wasn't - it wasn't the type of cover. We 13 briefly looked at it and it didn't do what we wanted to do, 14 so that was the last of our investigations into that. 15 16 Q. Did you make it clear in the course of negotiations as 17 to whether or not the Built-Plus scheme was real 18 traditional insurance versus -- 19 A. Oh, look, I -- 20 21 Q. Sorry, was not - I should withdraw that. Was not real 22 traditional insurance but rather had a discretionary 23 component? 24 A. Yes, I believe we did on a lot of occasions, yes. 25 26 Q. A lot? 27 A. Yes, a lot, yes. 28 29 Q. Or all? 30 A. I wouldn't like to say "all", but I think we made no 31 secret of the fact that the reason that this could be 32 provided at the price it was provided was because there was 33 a discretionary part and it wasn't all insurance, and that 34 when that was used up, there was an insurance product 35 behind it to back it up so that everyone, no matter what 36 happened, was going to be covered under the scheme, but if 37 there was a year when people didn't use it that much, that 38 the money could be reinvested into the scheme to keep the 39 prices and other things low, like it does, so -- 40 41 Q. Was anything said about who the promoter was in the 42 course of EBA negotiations? 43 A. I don't know. Probably not. There was always 44 available the little sheets with the covers for people - 45 you know -- 46 47 Q. For people. Which people?


1 A. Well, to the employers and to the employees, you know. 2 There was -- 3 4 Q. The single sheets were available, is that what you're 5 saying? 6 A. Single sheets. It was explained that there was the 7 proper PDF, the big document. Generally, people doing most 8 of the talking about it were the employers because they 9 were the ones that had to sign up to it and they were the 10 ones contributing for it, as part of the worker's package. 11 12 Q. Weren't the workers entitled to a proper explanation 13 as well? 14 A. I believe they got a proper explanation. We told them 15 that we were getting an income protection scheme that was 16 coming in. They were excited about it and I think they got 17 what they asked for. 18 19 Q. Can I ask you now to look at a slightly different 20 version of the Built-Plus clause. Can you turn to 21 page 1404 behind tab C. Do you see at 37.1 - have you got 22 1404 -- 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. -- that that is a slightly different format to what we 26 saw earlier: 27 28 The Company shall affect an agreed Income 29 Protection insurance policy for Employees 30 covered by this Agreement. The terms, 31 conditions and benefits provided by the 32 agreed insurance policy will be provided by 33 BUILT-PLUS. 34 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. That's in slightly different terms. Was that put in 38 with your input? 39 A. I would suggest - look, I'm not sure when the document 40 was signed. 41 42 Q. You can turn to the beginning of tab C, I think. It 43 is dated, with the Fair Work Commission, 14 March 2014. 44 A. I think a lot of the painters signed their agreements 45 towards the end of 2013. This one must have been signed - 46 he must have been a latecomer into the thing, but I didn't 47 have a lot of direct input into the painters' agreements.


1 I think I attended one meeting towards the end of it. They 2 must have agreed that they were going to use Built-Plus. 3 4 Q. In relation to this particular agreement, do you know 5 who was involved with its negotiation on behalf of the 6 Union? 7 A. Yes. I believe Garry Hamilton and I think 8 Fihi Kivalu. 9 10 Q. Can I ask you about, in this same document, the CCW 11 clause at page 1388, or at 12.5. 12 A. Sorry, is that in - that's in Optimum Bricklaying. 13 14 Q. Tab C. The same agreement. 15 A. Sorry, what page is that? 16 17 Q. Page 1388. 18 A. Sorry? 19 20 Q. Clause 12.5. 21 A. Okay, yes. Sorry, yes. 22 23 Q. This one is again slightly different to the one we saw 24 earlier in relation to CCW: 25 26 The Company agrees to pay $1.00 per day per 27 employee to a maximum of $5.00 per week to 28 an Audit and Training Fund (ATF). The 29 $5.00 per week contributions to the ATF 30 will be distributed in the following way: 31 32 a. $1.00 per week will be donated to the 33 Construction Charitable Works [ABN number] 34 a construction charity set up to provide 35 welfare services which is determined to 36 improve the lives of building workers and 37 their families during a time of need; and 38 39 b. $4.00 per week will be deposited into 40 the ATF. 41 42 Do you see that? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. At 12.6 it says: 46 47 The ATF will pay all costs associated with


1 the auditing of all companies that have a 2 ratified agreement with the Union and an 3 annual training course for Employees on how 4 to read pay slips and the Agreement. 5 6 What's all that about, can you assist? 7 A. Yes, I can. This was a great idea we had. In the 8 bricklayers' negotiations - and I see there's a 9 bricklayers' agreement at tab D. Believe it or not, but in 10 Canberra, there is a lot of people who have agreements and 11 they don't comply with them, and it was a concern of ours 12 and a concern of employers. We wanted to make sure that 13 people were complying with their agreements. In a lot of 14 other agreements, we just get them to pay for the audit. 15 These employees decided that they wanted to put money aside 16 to pay for the audit which would be administered. I think 17 if you look at the bricklayers' agreement, it was to be 18 audited by the Brick and Block Foundation. There was all 19 these - it was just extremely hard and complex to do. So 20 they decided they wanted to donate the dollar from the 21 travel instead of from ACIRT to Construction Charitable 22 Works and that the rest of the money be put aside to pay 23 for the audits. 24 25 If you look there's some pretty - there were audits to 26 be undertaken, I think, three months after the agreement 27 was signed after nine months and then 12 months after that, 28 and the idea of the remaining funds being paid to pay for a 29 course by the individual workers - because we believed that 30 if the workers knew all about their agreement and they knew 31 what they were entitled to and what their pay slip should 32 look like, and they were educated better, they were less 33 likely to be ripped off by unscrupulous employers. It was 34 a great idea at the time but we never actually started the 35 ATF and we took that clause out of our agreements ongoing 36 because it was just - it was really unmanageable. It was 37 something that the bricklayers asked us to do; then the 38 painters' agreement was the next one that came along and we 39 thought that was a really good idea, but we just went back 40 and said, "Listen, this is a clause - we can either vary 41 your agreements or you just agree, you know, that you guys, 42 when the order comes up, you just pay for it because we 43 didn't want to have anything to do with dealing with, you 44 know, the funds. 45 46 Q. Are you saying that it was no longer included after a 47 certain point of time?


1 A. No. I think you'll find it in some bricklayers' 2 agreements and the painters' agreements, yes. 3 4 Q. Just going back, if I may, to the Cbus questions 5 I asked you, you said that you didn't have what you were 6 after, the Cbus Insurance? 7 A. I didn't believe so, no. 8 9 Q. What was it about it, can you recall? 10 A. No. Sorry, I can't, no. It was a brief - we briefly 11 looked at it. We didn't believe it - I probably looked at 12 it and didn't believe it was what we were after and didn't 13 look any further, so I couldn't give you any real 14 indication of what it was at this stage. 15 16 Q. Just before I conclude my questions, page 1404, back 17 on the income protection insurance, just noting that at 18 clause 37.1, the word "insurance" is used both in the 19 heading and in the clause itself. 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. Did that cause you any sense of disquiet? 23 A. No. No. Look, I'm not an insurance broker or lawyer. 24 That was what we called the scheme, you know, so, you know, 25 if that word shouldn't be in there, you know, that's - 26 yeah, sorry. It was, yeah, no grand plan to call the 27 product what it wasn't; you know, we believed there was 28 insurance. 29 30 MS McNAUGHTON: They're my questions. Thank you, 31 Commissioner. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Borgeest? 34 35 MR BORGEEST: I have no questions for Mr O'Mara. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 38 39 MR AGIUS: We have no questions. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. 42 43 Q. Mr O'Mara, you are coming back a little later, 44 I think, to deal with other aspects of the inquiry that 45 have been going on in Canberra in the last three weeks. 46 Have they given you a precise date? 47 A. I think it's late August, maybe the first week in


1 September. 2 3 Q. Yes. If you have some difficulties of convenience, if 4 you speak to Mr Pasfield or Mr Agius, they will speak to 5 their opposite numbers in the Commission and an attempt 6 will be made to meet their convenience and your 7 convenience. 8 A. That would be appreciated. 9 10 Q. For that reason, I cannot excuse you from your summons 11 now, but thank you for coming along and, in particular, 12 thank you for waiting so long -- 13 A. No worries. 14 15 Q. -- before giving your evidence. 16 A. Thank you. 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: You may leave the witness box. 19 20 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms McNaughton, no more evidence today? 23 24 MS McNAUGHTON: No more evidence today. We have more 25 evidence in a slightly different case study starting on 26 Monday next week. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Should we adjourn this hearing 29 until -- 30 31 MS McNAUGHTON: Monday at 10. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: -- Monday at 10. The hearing will 34 resume on Monday at 10am. 35 36 AT 2.50PM THE COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, 10 AUGUST 37 2015 AT 10AM 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47


Documents

Web view15 you see there an email from yourself to Mr Stewart, 16 Mr Hamilton, jdean@ csisafety ... Rod Driver and.06/08/2015 CFMEU FUNDS 329 J L O