Regular episodes of amnesia dog ‘Slippery Dan’ Andrews

Daniel Andrews – widely recognised as possessing one of the sharpest political minds in the nation – was struck by episodes of amnesia during his secret testimony before Operation Sandon.

Operation Daintree is not the first time Daniel Andrews has suffered memory loss while being cross-­examined by Victoria’s anti-­corruption agency.

The Victorian Premier – widely recognised as possessing one of the sharpest political minds in the nation – was struck by episodes of amnesia during his secret testimony before Operation Sandon.

A confidential record of his private cross-examination in Operation Sandon, a marathon independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission inquiry into allegedly corrupt land deals between a developer and Casey councillors, shows he offered variations of ‘‘I can’t recall’’ in a number of key moments.

In the stand and under oath, he was asked about interactions with businessman John Woodman, one of the main targets of Operation Sandon. IBAC, according to the agency’s account, asks the Premier about a conversation he had with veteran ALP-aligned lobbyist Philip Staindl, also associated with Woodman, in March 2019.

Staindl, IBAC says, recounted a conversation with Andrews to Woodman, saying the Premier heaped praise on Woodman, described a journalist as an arsehole and asked him to apologise to Woodman as a proposed rezoning of land in Casey had been shelved.

IBAC’s account of Andrews’s response to these questions is that he could not recollect the specifics of the conversation but he did remember enough to dispute the claims that he had referred to the journalist as an arsehole.

The Premier, IBAC says, goes on to say he was uncertain as to whether he might have discussed with his planning minister that in the wake of a series of stories written by the journalist the rezoning should be delayed.

At one point, he initially agrees that Staindl may have given him Woodman’s mobile phone number but when IBAC suggests this signals he intended apologising to Woodman over the failed rezoning bid, the Premier changes his position, saying he believes it is highly unlikely Staindl gave him Woodman’s mobile number.

Operation Daintree’s 132-page report is littered with references to the Premier’s failure to recall specifics; he couldn’t recall what was discussed at a critical meeting with the Health Workers Union just weeks before the $1.3m training contract was announced and didn’t know what the key union adviser in the Premier’s Private Office was up to.

IBAC’s account of the Premier’s evidence is damning: ‘‘The Premier had no recollection of what he discussed with (Diana) Asmar, no recollection of any discussion with his advisers that led to this announcement and no awareness that they and the Minister for Health’s adviser had discussed a detailed proposal including costings 10 days before the announcement that the HEF should deliver training to 1000 workers over a four-year ­period.

‘‘It is highly likely the Premier was informed of the commitment proposal as formulated by his advisers and conveyed the substance of the intended commitment to Ms Asmar when he met her before making the announcement.”

During his examination, Andrews ultimately accepted he may have done so. ‘‘After the Premier realised that his recollection of what he announced was faulty, he left open the possibility that he may have made a commitment to Ms Asmar but remained quite uncertain that what he announced amounted to a commitment.’’

IBAC went on: ‘‘Before the meeting (October 4, 2018), the PPO prepared a memorandum containing similar information and recommendations to that in the memorandum from 21 September, 2018, with the addition that the Premier should inform Ms Asmar of a ‘proposed $1m scholarship program to facilitate upskilling health services workers’.

‘‘The Premier did not recall reading Ms Asmar’s letter or either memorandum prepared for this meeting, although he accepted he would ordinarily receive such a document as part of a briefing.”

Someone with knowledge of Andrews when he fronts integrity agencies describes him as ‘‘slippery’’. And IBAC’s frustration with him becomes clear in the report. Yet after four secret cross-­examinations of the Premier, it’s time for the watchdog to test the boundaries of its powers rather than appear comfortable to live within its limitations.