Clive Palmer staff stripped of cheque power

CLIVE Palmer ensured that top employees would lose control over a bank account holding more than $12m in Chinese funds, court documents say.

Clive Palmer in parliament this month. Picture: Stefan Postles

CLIVE Palmer ensured that several top employees would lose control over a bank account holding more than $12 million in Chinese funds, just weeks before he allegedly wrote two cheques to “dishonestly” procure the cash, court documents say

Mr Palmer changed the authorisations for the National Australia Bank cheque account, called “Port Palmer Operations”, on about July 24, 2013, six weeks before the federal election contested by his Palmer United Party.

According to a document filed in the Queensland Supreme Court, the bank account had “multiple authorised signatories” including Mr Palmer’s trusted employees: the head of his Mineralogy company’s West Australian operations, Vimal Sharma, and Paul Robinson, who was appointed to oversee the port of Cape Preston. However, on July 24 last year Mr Palmer “caused other signatories to the (account) to be removed such that he became thereafter the sole signatory to the account”.

GRAPHIC: Chinese make their case

The Chinese backed their claims by citing “evidence of Mr Paul Robinson” in a hearing of a confidential arbitration tribunal in Brisbane in May this year, as well as “National Australia Bank ­account authority cards signed by Palmer”, and disclosures by the federal MP’s own lawyers. The bank was compelled by a subpoena to hand over numerous documents relating to the account.

Mr Palmer has repeatedly and strenuously denied any wrong­doing, accusing the Chinese of trying to steal iron ore from his tenements without paying royalties. Asked by The Australian at the National Press Club in Canberra earlier this month about the cheques, Mr Palmer said he could not recall whether he had signed them. He cut short questioning by the ABC’s 7.30 this month by walking out of the interview.

The Chinese said they made five significant payments into the bank account “for the sole and exclusive purpose” of operating a port in the three years leading up to Mr Palmer’s unprecedented withdrawals of $10m in early Aug­ust and $2.167m in early September last year.

The account’s balance was $12,117,638 until August 8 when Mr Palmer signed a cheque, no. 2046, to withdraw $10m, which went to a company he controlled, Cosmo Developments Pty Ltd.

“Cosmo, at all material times, was not engaged in the provision, supply or arrangement of port management services in relation to the port,” the Supreme Court document states.

“Cosmo did not render any invoice to Mineralogy in relation to the $10 million payment.

“Cosmo did not provide any goods or services to Mineralogy in relation to the port for or in respect of the $10 million payment. Mineralogy did not provide any remittance advice to Cosmo in  respect of the $10 million ­payment.”

The Chinese disclosed in the document that Mr Palmer’s solicitors had stated in writing “there are no documents in Mineralogy’s possession relating to the $10 million payment”.

The Supreme Court document adds: “At no time during 2013 or until May 2014 was Robinson aware of the $10 million payment despite his position as chief executive officer responsible within Mineralogy for the port.”

In relation to the second cheque, no. 2073, which Mr Palmer signed to pay $2,167,065 on September 2 to the Brisbane agency placing PUP’s election advertising, Media Circus Network Pty Ltd, the document states that the agency had nothing to do with the port.

The document states Mr Robinson “was unaware of any obligation on the part of Mineralogy to make the payment of $10m or $2.167m respectively in relation to the port, had never prepared a ­logistical plan requiring $12m worth of expenditure at the port on personnel, and knew of nobody else within Mineralogy who had done so”.

The payments were described in the records of Mineralogy as being for “port management ser­vices”, but this description, according to the Supreme Court document, was “false”.

“Palmer knew the payments were not made for port management ser­vices because he signed the cheques in favour of two companies not involved in port management services; he knew Mineralogy was not in possession of the port in the second half of 2013”.