SAJC--report of inquiry into suitability of close associates - Portellos ...

Inquiry into the suitability of certain close associates of the
South Australian Jockey Club
Report
wanting discovery of documents and things, and that’s when I then started to—I thought that
when the election was not announced and injunction was applied, I was extremely shocked
and surprised. In fact I was very annoyed, as it evolved over time, from then on, to think that
why did this happen? Why did they do that? And you know, I didn’t—just a personal opinion,
I thought it wasn’t necessary. I probably—it’s a personal judgment, not in discussion with
anyone else—I probably thought, well, they became very frustrated and desperate, or
whatever, in terms of wanting better control at board level. I don’t know. That’s all I can
assume.
In further questioning, Mr O’Brien was invited to express a view as to whether the
outcome of Mr Spear’s legal proceedings—which had started with an application for a
temporary injunction to restrain the announcement of the 2008 election result and
concluded with a settlement which included the fresh elections in 2009—had justified
the initiation of those proceedings. Mr O’Brien responded that he wondered about the
legality of the settlement and the validity of the 2009 election.
Mr O’Brien did accept that, in the proceedings, the SAJC had admitted that there had
been serious problems with the 2008 election. He then raised some concerns about the
propriety of Mr Spear by reference to a photograph appearing in the Advertiser on 9
May 2009, showing Mr Spear and certain associates in a room with what were said to
be leaked SAJC membership forms (see the report of Mr Spear’s examination on
page 27). He agreed that Mr Spear would have, as an SAJC board member, a right of
access to the forms but only at the SAJC office. He qualified his remarks by saying
that he had formed his view on the basis of what had appeared in the Advertiser and
had no evidence that Mr Spear had participated in the provision of SAJC records to
others.
Mr O’Brien was asked about his candidature for the 2009 election:
Mr O’Brien, how did you come to be on the ticket of nine for the current election?—There was
a group of concerned businessmen who decided they’d thought enough is enough in regard to
all the bad publicity. I mean, I’ve got to say as a member I think it has been terrible for the
whole industry. It has been terrible for the members. I feel real concern for the membership
base of the Jockey Club. You’d have to even ask yourself why in the hell are you a member
almost, because all the exposure, the terrible publicity that’s gone on—that’s been out there,
been exposed. It’s terrible. I feel sorry for the staff. I feel very concerned for the staff at the
Jockey Club. I guess the people that came on this group decided that it was time to stand up
and offer themselves for, you know, election.
Who organised the group?—It wasn’t me. I just don’t know how it exactly evolved.
This was taken further by reference to Mr O’Brien’s election policy statement and
those of the other 8 candidates:
Who coordinated the preparation of the manifesto document?—It was just a creative person.
A creative person?—Well, it’s all our own wording.
Yes.—Like, you’ve seen my prior one here. That had to be abbreviated back to 250 words. It’s
not easy, I guess, and so that’s—they’re pretty much each individual’s wording.
Your manifesto is—there’s an opening paragraph that talks about you and the rest of the
wording of it is identical with the other eight candidates’ manifestos. That’s correct, isn’t
it?—That it’s consistent with them? Yes.
43