ACU calls in cyber crisis team to find $1m leaker; High flyer Peter Harris fails to mention airport stake

Australian Catholic University vice-chancellor Zlatko Skrbis.

At a recent high-level gathering of Australian Catholic University officials, vice-chancellor Zlatko Skrbis was asked whether an independent investigation was warranted into the troubled institution, particularly over the costly and scandalous termination of its dean of law, Professor Kate Galloway.

Skrbis’s response, according to an account provided to Margin Call, was that a further inquiry wasn’t possible because an independent investigation was already afoot, an answer that seemed to allay concerns among those in the room.

What Skrbis didn’t mention, however, was that the inquiry he spoke of wasn’t even skirting the edges of the Galloway matter. It was really an internal probe designed to out any individuals responsible for leaking details of the controversy. There’s a more common term for it: management revenge.

Margin Call has established that ACU has engaged a cyber crisis team from Clayton Utz to up-end the university’s IT systems, with at least one ACU staff member assigned to the full-time drudgery of sifting through emails. Meanwhile, the substance of the revelations exposed by this column remain wholly ignored by the university’s overseers, led by chancellor Martin Daubney KC.

At least one regulatory body has taken an interest in the Galloway dismissal and the trampling of academic freedoms that unfolded at the university. National regulator TEQSA is known to be making inquiries into the clandestine financial arrangement that was brokered to get rid of her, and the questionable governance of those ­involved. This is no small development, with commonwealth funding of the university seen to be at stake.

Weeks into starting her role as dean of law, the professor was secretly paid more than $1m by ACU in March to relinquish her position and accept a reassignment. What outraged staff most was that the payment had been authorised while the university was facing a $35m budgetary black hole and embarking on mass redundancies to cut costs.

Skrbis, who was pivotal in facilitating the deal, later explained Galloway’s departure and newly allocated role of “strategic professor” as one based on her “integrity”, “professionalism” and “proven research record”. It was an absurd proposition, like finding out the executive chef at your favourite restaurant has just been given the exciting new job of dishwashing, to reward their outstanding performance.

And what was Galloway’s pet academic speciality, her “proven research record” as cited by Skrbis? Abortion reform. Her positions were totally at odds with those of the Catholic institution.

Responding to the Clayton Utz revelation, ACU said the university reserved its right to investigate breaches of privacy. “It is entirely inappropriate and a serious breach of confidentiality for someone to publicly air the employment arrangements of a staff member. This is standard practice in any organisation.”

And what about secretly paying a professor to quit a job that was won on merit, through a selection process run by the university itself, for holding a position that someone in management found uncomfortable? There’s been no accountability, yet, for this total disgrace.

Clash of interests

Former productivity commissioner Peter Harris was in the Financial Review this week complaining that Infrastructure Minister Catherine King still hadn’t acted on reforms that he’d once proposed for the slot system at Sydney Airport.

“You could support more than three carriers if you would have reformed the slots at Sydney Airport, and you had a prescription from me on how to do it,” Harris said. “That report was done for the second year of the Morrison government.” By that he meant it’s been sitting untouched on someone’s desk for years.

Former productivity commissioner Peter Harris.

King said this week that the government had been consulting for months and would legislate for slot reform in the near future. Harris, however, wants her to get on it already. “I don’t know why we’re waiting for anything. It feels like this portfolio never gets decent attention from any government.”

Well, he would say that. Not mentioned by Harris or by the newspaper is that the former productivity commissioner is on the advisory board of Global Infrastructure Partners, which owns 37 per cent of Sydney Airport Corporation Limited. GIP is its largest shareholder. They, of course, would benefit substantially from any impending slot reforms at the airport.

A clash of interests that Harris might want to mention, no?

Better late than never

A criminal charge was suddenly laid this week by corporate regulator ASIC against Mark Stevens, who until a few days ago had been the executive chair of listed defence and body armour company HighCom.

The allegation of dishonestly causing a financial disadvantage by deception concerns a business that Stevens ran a decade ago and ended up in liquidation around 2015. He’s accused of redirecting $110,000 that was payable to the advisory business, MWCLMS, just a few weeks after it had appointed an administrator.

The timing of all this ASIC activity is curious. The regulator said it commenced its investigation in 2016 once it received a report from liquidator Vincents. Eight years? It’s taken eight years to lay one measly charge over a non-life-changing amount of money?

The real curiosity here is that ASIC appears to have gone for Stevens just as he appeared in London a fortnight ago to unveil his latest venture, Periscope Capital Partners, during the Australian British Defence Catalyst. It’s an annual gathering of defence leaders who trade secrets under Chatham House rules. A notable sight at the launch of Periscope, at Australia House, London, was High Commissioner Stephen Smith.

Asked about the development, Stevens told Margin Call he’s been given limited information. “It occurred eight years ago and was fully settled at that time. We have not been contacted by ASIC in any way regarding this since then until now and remain unaware of any detail,” he said.

Weird, too, that ASIC issued a statement claiming that Stevens appeared in court to answer the allegation. Not accurate; Stevens wasn’t in court for that at all, but presumably he will be next time, on September 24, where a not guilty plea is expected.

Copy and paste

A big L for Amanda Banton and her Banton Group legal firm after it failed on Friday to convince a judge it should lead a class action against Andrew Budzinski’s IC Markets.

Amanda Banton.

Banton’s problem was a reckless lack of originality as she competed against a combined legal team from Echo Law and Piper Alderman to run the case.

Banton was outed during hearings for plagiarising the competition’s work; the only difference between the filings was the Banton Group name on the first page of the document. Banton, of course, wouldn’t concede to any theft; she called it “harmonisation”.

Unfamiliar with Banton? She pleaded guilty to assaulting a female lawyer in 2018 at a Banco Chambers party in the Royal Botanic Gardens. Classy.

In court on Friday, Justice Jim Delany didn’t hold back.

“To describe what has occurred as plagiarism may sound harsh, but it is accurate,” he said.

“The pleadings were copied and pasted …”

Echo and Piper Alderman, meanwhile, are free to proceed.