WA casino regulator did not have policies for money laundering

The former chair of WA’s Gaming and Wagering Commission said the body was mostly concerned with the public impact of the casino rather than money laundering.

Gaming and Wagering Commission chairman Duncan Ord. Picture: Colin Murty

The regulator responsible for overseeing Crown’s Perth casino had few money laundering policies or procedures at the time hundreds of millions of dollars were allegedly being laundered through the venue by Asian organised crime syndicates.

The current and former chairs of Western Australia’s Gaming and Wagering Commission have both been questioned at length over the first two days of witness testimonies at the state’s Royal Commission into the Perth casino.

Barry Sargeant, who was replaced as chairman of the GWC after a departmental merger in 2017 but who remains a member of the panel, told the inquiry on Tuesday that the GWC was mostly concerned with the public and community impact of the casino, and matters such as the payout ratio of gambling machines in the casino.

He also said the casino manual which detailed procedures and processes of the regulator did not specifically address money laundering. Instead, he said the investigation of money laundering was seen as a responsibility of other bodies and as something beyond the resources of his department.

He also said he stood by his decision to allow the state’s then-chief casino officer Mick Connolly to continue in his role after Mr Connolly disclosed his friendship with a member of Crown’s legal and compliance team some time in 2015. Mr Connolly eventually stepped aside earlier this year after the relationships with Crown general manager of legal and compliance Claude Marais, as well as Crown manager of gaming and regulatory compliance Paul Hulme, were publicly revealed.

And the former GWC chairman also explained the decision in 2015 to scrap embedded, full-time casino inspectors, saying that broadening their roles to include racing, other gaming and liquor matters offered greater cost efficiencies.

The Royal Commission is examining the work of both Crown and the state’s casino regulator in the years that money laundering was allegedly occurring at the venue since 2014. The inquiry was called after NSW’s Bergin report cited money laundering in Perth as a reason for stripping Crown of its licence to operate Sydney’s new Barangaroo casino.

The first leg of the inquiry is focusing on the state’s regulatory framework and the capabilities and effectiveness of the GWC, which was responsible for overseeing the casino’s compliance.

Under questioning from Michael Feutrill SC, senior counsel assisting, Mr Sargeant said the regulator felt that money laundering issues were better handled by the likes of the Federal organised crime and money laundering agency.

“If you look at the powers that particularly the Commonwealth bodies have, they’re empowered statutorily to look money laundering, they’re resourced, they’re trained to identify, investigate and deal with money laundering,” Mr Sargeant said.

“So my view was that in the case of that risk to the casino, it was something that was covered by another body. It wasn’t one that we had the resources for.”

Asked if there was any consideration given to specific skills in the regulation of casino operations when making appointments to the GWC, Mr Sargeant said the focus was on the public interest.

“I felt confident that the expertise was in the department to provide that advice (on casino operations) to the commission.”