IBAC report a damning indictment of politics under Daniel Andrews

Property developer John Woodman is a witness in IBAC’s Operation Sandon investigation into allegations of corrupt conduct involving councillors and property developers in the City of Casey in Melbourne's south-east. Picture: Aaron Francis

Daniel Andrews has avoided any adverse findings from IBAC, but Operation Sandon represents an indictment of Victorian politics on his watch and in his backyard.

Unlike Casey councillors who were grilled in public by the anti-corruption agency, the state’s most powerful politician for almost a decade was afforded the comfort -— for a third, maybe even a fourth time — of a private examination.

IBAC’s final report, released Thursday morning after a five-year investigation, details how John Woodman used political donations to effectively buy access to not just local councillors but also the Premier and senior Labor ministers in the Andrews Government. IBAC calls it “privileged access”.

The Premier’s association with Woodman is covered in some detail in the 308-page report. On one level, it’s not surprising that Andrews and Woodman share a long history, perhaps at times even a friendship.

Andrews is a political powerbroker from the south-east of Melbourne while Woodman is a businessman who made a fortune developing property in the south-east of Melbourne.

It’s worth remembering how Woodman described their relationship to The Australian last year: “I’m happy to go on the record and say I’ve known Daniel since he had pimples on his face, met him at fundraisers years ago.”

Asked why he was such a strong supporter of the Premier’s, Woodman offered this: “Look at all those level crossings (removed), who else would have done that? It’s a bit like a footy team, sometimes they get things wrong, but they’re still your team.”

Much of the fallout from Thursday’s release of its final report will focus on IBAC’s scathing findings against former Casey councillors Sam Aziz and Geoff Ablett, both former Liberal Party members, who were found to have pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments from Woodman in return for favourable planning decisions.

IBAC concluded there was “clear evidence of two Casey councillors accepting personal benefits from making or influencing council decisions related to planning or land use”. It’s probable that when the agency forwards its report and supporting evidence to the DPP to consider laying criminal charges Woodman, Aziz and Ablett will come under intense scrutiny.

IBAC may well have its scalps.

But it would be a mistake to think that IBAC’s evidence of misdeeds of suburban councillors is the most important aspect of Operation Sandon.

Far more significant are its observations about the broader political culture in this state, the making of politics here and how political donations have oiled the wheels of the Labor and Liberal parties.

The most significant paragraphs in the entire 308 pages is probably this one:

“IBAC’s Operation Sandon exposed improper conduct, which exposed corruption risks in planning, political donations, lobbying, and council governance. The reforms recommended in Operation Sandon aim to raise the standard of anti-corruption controls in Victoria.”

What about this one:

“Over the following years (after 2014), Mr Woodman also maintained contact with other senior ministers, in particular the Treasurer, Minister for Roads and Minister for Transport Infrastructure, through Progressive Business and other channels. Through Mr Staindl and Progressive Business, Mr Woodman obtained access to the Premier, Deputy Premier,

Treasurer, Attorney-General, Minister for Roads and Minister for Education. Each held portfolios relevant to planning decisions.”

And then there is this recommendation:

“The Premier ensures that the Taskforce considers and recommends whether the

regulatory regime governing donations in Victoria would be strengthened by identifying and prohibiting high-risk groups (including, but not limited to, property developers) from making political donations to political entities and state and local government candidates.”

Andrews’ private examination in Operation Sandon is, in fact, the third time the most powerful person in the state has been invited for a fireside chat rather than be subjected to a public firestorm. In fact, it could be four private examinations for the premier, as neither he nor IBAC has denied that he has been grilled in secret as part of the “double triple secret” inquiry into his government and the firefighters union known as Operation Richmond.

IBAC has argued that its legislation imposes a high bar before someone can be called for a public hearing. But the reality is, the agency has played small, not tall, when dealing with the Premier.

The fact that a collection of suburban councillors were flamed in public over their dealings with a property developer yet the premier of Victoria was questioned about his dealings with the very same developer in private has never been sufficiently explained by IBAC.