Labor ‘has betrayed’ IBAC witnesses

Just months after inviting witnesses to share their experiences, a Labor-led parliamentary inquiry into IBAC has walked away from them by ending its public inquiry.

Harriet Shing wrote to witnesses in ­Operation Sandon, confirming they would not be invited to appear in public hearings and their submissions would be mostly shelved. Picture: Daniel Pockett

A Labor-led parliamentary ­inquiry into the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Com­mission’s witness welfare ­record has shut itself down three months after inviting witnesses to share their experiences during an anti-corruption investigation.

Just six weeks after it emerged that Premier Daniel Andrews was secretly grilled in Operation Sandon, parliament’s integrity and oversight committee, chaired by Labor MP Harriet Shing, has called an end to its public inquiry.

On Wednesday, Ms Shing wrote to multiple witnesses in ­Operation Sandon, a probe into allegedly corrupt land deals that has been blamed for the suicide of a former mayor, confirming they would not be invited to appear in public hearings and their submissions would be mostly shelved.

Amanda Stapledon. Picture: Chris Eastman

Several witnesses launched ­attacks on the committee after ­receiving the letter, telling The Australian they felt betrayed after its initial public statements led them to believe they would have the chance to testify in public.

“Shamefully, the integrity and oversight committee has proven to be toothless show pony,” one said. “What was the point of raising our hopes by inviting public submissions, only to then turn around and shut us all down?

“It’s left us feeling violated and shattered, firstly by IBAC and now by the committee.”

Another witness accused the Labor-dominated committee of abandoning its own inquiry to protect Mr Andrews. “The committee has walked away from its initial undertakings to us in order to protect the Premier. We have been let down.”

On March 18, Ms Shing ­announced the terms of a public inquiry into IBAC’s witness welfare policies and the circumstances around whether public or private examinations were held in the wake of the suicide of Operation Sandon witness and former Casey mayor Amanda Stapledon.

“We invite submissions from the public to this important and timely review ... the committee is keen to hear from interested groups and individuals on witness welfare,” she said in a press release issued by the committee.

In the press release, the committee invited submissions to cover “the experiences of witnesses and others involved in Victorian integrity agency investi­gations (including any matters ­relating to health, safety, wellbeing and reputation)”.

On May 6, The Australian ­revealed Mr Andrews had been ­secretly called before IBAC over his association with John Woodman, the businessman at the centre of Operation Sandon.

Most Casey councillors, ­including Stapledon, were examined in public in a process that friends say left her humiliated, ­isolated and paranoid. She took her life three days after receiving IBAC’s draft report.

During his examination, Mr Andrews was questioned about whether he had been given Mr Woodman’s mobile phone number. IBAC also focused on the fact Mr Woodman and Mr Andrews attended the same political fundraising functions, with the agency probing whether donations delivered what it described as “privileged access” and the appearance of a “sense of obligation” to Mr Woodman from ministers.

Ms Shing explains in the near-identical letters to Operation Sandon witnesses the committee’s review related to the “general frameworks and systems of integrity agencies” before going on to say it was not authorised to consider the “specific circumstances” about IBAC’s conduct in Operation Sandon that have been raised in submissions.

She has informed the witnesses that their submissions will be ­accepted as “wholly confidential” and as such cannot be “published, provided to anyone, or quoted, paraphrased or cited in a committee report” and they will not be invited to appear at a public hearing.

Ms Shing has told the witnesses that only general “thematic concerns” raised in the submissions about IBAC’s witness welfare policies will be considered by the committee.

Ms Shing and the committee did not respond to questions on Wednesday from The Australian.