Sarah Scopel leaves Woolworths role as Star fallout spreads

Star Entertainment’s former treasurer Sarah Scopel has quit her role at Woolworths after ‘utterly misleading’ National Australia Bank while at the Star.

Sarah Scopel has left her role as treasurer of Woolworths Group after evidence she gave about transactions when she worked for Star as its treasurer. Picture: Gordon McComiskie

The fallout of a royal commission-style inquiry into Star Entertainment has spread beyond the casino giant, with the group’s former treasurer Sarah Scopel stepping down “immediately” from her role at Woolworths after she conceded “utterly misleading” National Australia Bank while at the Star.

Three weeks after the inquiry heard her role in disguising almost $1bn of gambling transactions on China debit cards as hotel expenses, Ms Scopel has departed Woolworths and also quit her directorship at Australian Corporate Treasury Association (ACTA).

Ms Scopel’s tenure at Woolworths in the highly sensitive role of group treasurer was first raised by The Australian’s Margin Call column in March when the former Star casino executive and group treasurer gave her damning evidence at the inquiry.

“Woolworths Group and Sarah Scopel have mutually agreed that Sarah will step down from her role as Group Treasurer for Woolworths Group with immediate effect,” Woolworths said.

Similarly, ACTA chief executive Ben Leaver said: “Australian Corporate Treasury Association and Sarah Scopel have mutually agreed that Sarah will step down from her role as a director and board member of the Australian Corporate Treasury Association with immediate effect.”

Ms Scopel’s departure from Woolworths and ACTA follows the resignation of Star Entertainment chief executive Matt Bekier after eight years leading the company. Star is expected to remove other top figures, with the casino giant’s chief financial officer Harry Theodore set to resign within weeks.

On Friday the NSW Independent Liquor & Gaming Authority approved inquiry head Adam Bell SC’s request to summon more witnesses. The company’s executive team, including Mr Bekier, Mr Theodore, chief legal and risk officer Paula Martin and NSW chief casino officer Greg Hawkins, will be hauled before the inquiry from next week.

The inquiry heard on Friday that Star continued to allow Chinese junket Suncity to use an exclusive gaming salon at its Pyrmont casino, despite police charging six members with dealing with the proceeds of crime there in 2018 – a fact it did not disclose to the NSW gaming regulator. The review into Star’s suitability to hold a NSW casino licence also heard that, as a “general practice”, its group general counsel Andrew Power marked emails “confidential and privileged” – even when he wasn’t giving legal advice – in a move that risked “shielding” key documents from regulatory scrutiny.

Ms Scopel was once a Macquarie banker and a senior member of treasury teams at Caltex Australia and Origin Energy.

Sarah Scopel.

In 2019, a year after Ms Scopel joined Star, China Union Pay asked NAB to investigate a series of transactions at the casino group involving its debit cards. The transactions had raised eyebrows at China’s central bank, which said it had observed individual card holders spending more than $20m at Star and was “struggling to see how this level of expenditure could be made on non-gambling entertainment”.

Gambling is illegal in China and Union Pay Cards cannot be used for that purpose. Beijing also bans individuals from exchanging the equivalent of $US50,000 a year, with casinos offering a way to evade authorities and take money out of the country.

Star told NAB: “The card holder purchased hotel accommodation services with the transactions in question.”

Counsel assisting the inquiry Naomi Sharp SC asked Ms Scopel: “That statement was utterly false, was it not?”

Ms Scopel agreed and conceded she knew it was at the time. “I didn’t specifically review the transactions themselves, but I expect they were not purely hotel accommodation,” she said.

Ms Scopel worked with Mr Theodore and general counsel Oliver White to provide responses to NAB.

The responses did not mention gambling but used “integrated resorts”, a euphemism for casinos. Mr White told the inquiry on Thursday: “The language here is using sort of industry wording … the use of integrated resorts as opposed to casinos as the description of casinos, that’s used within the industry.

“So I fully accept … if you didn’t know the sort of the industry lingo, jargon, that this could be misleading.”

Ms Sharp said that Mr White drafted a “highly unethical response to provide to the bank”.

“With hindsight, I wholeheartedly agree,” he said.

Misleading NAB is one of the many explosive allegations from the inquiry, which is entering its fifth week on Monday. The inquiry has been examining Star’s links to the Chinese Suncity junket, which has links to triads and organised crime, and attracted the interest of Australian law enforcement in 2017, who suspected it was laundering $2m a day.

Star caught Suncity staff of CCTV exchanging bundles of cash from backpacks for gambling chips in an exclusive gaming salon at its Pyrmont, Sydney, casino in May 2018 – effectively operating its own casino cage, flouting state laws that stipulate only the casino operator can provide chips.

Group general counsel Andrew Power told the inquiry on Friday that he advised of several risks to the business, including potentially breaching the Casino Control Act, money laundering concerns and whether Suncity’s behaviour contravened its agreement with Star.

Police later charged six Suncity members with dealing with the proceeds of crime. But Mr Power said Star did not alert the gaming regulator about this action.

“You don’t disclose … the police were involved in matters that it occurred in Salon 95 in 2018,” Ms Sharp said.

Mr Power replied: “I did not disclose that to the regulator, no.”

“And you didn’t disclose that you personally had a concern that money laundering had occurred in Salon 95 in 2018 and 2019?” Ms Sharp said.

Mr Power said: “I don’t believe I’ve ever disclosed suspicious matters to the regulator, the state casino regulator, no.”

Earlier on Friday, Mr Power said he marked emails with “confidential and privileged” despite not providing legal advice and therefore incorrectly claiming privilege.

“If I was dealing with something that was sensitive or may later be looked at or reviewed, then yes, I would mark it as privileged and confidential just to flag the sensitivity of it and the importance of it,” Mr Power said.

Ms Sharp asked if he did that to “shield your communications from production to regulator”. “Did you ever turn your mind to that being an effective your practice of marking these communications?” Ms Sharp asked.

“This was more a flag that to anyone who may be reading it down the track that it was drafted by a lawyer and that it may contain legal advice. I think that was the point of it,” Mr Power replied.

Later, Ms Sharp asked Mr Power if the NSW regulator should have “any confidence in your judgment”. “I would hope the answer that is yes,” he said.