The Committee overseeing the Rosehill parliamentary inquiry has recommended that a Racing NSW submission be referred to the Privileges Committee as “it may constitute a substantial interference with the work of the committee and therefore a possible contempt”.
The latest twist in the Rosehill saga came when the Select Committee on the Proposal to Develop Rosehill Racecourse submitted a Special Report on "possible contempt" in the inquiry into the proposal to develop Rosehill Racecourse in the Upper House on Friday.
It recommends that the House refers the submission put forward by Racing NSW on August 12 to the Privileges Committee, who determine whether it may be a contempt of parliament.
That submission by Racing NSW came three days after chief executive Peter V’landys and chief operations officer Graeme Hinton had appeared at the second day of public hearings.
“On 12 August 2024, the committee received correspondence from Racing NSW, responding to matters raised in the hearing on 9 August 2024,” the Special Report said.
“The correspondence made specific reference to allegations raised at the hearing by a member arising out of confidential evidence received by the committee. Racing NSW's correspondence stated that it had 'investigated the issues raised with utmost urgency'."
It went on to say:
“Given the rest of the contents of the Racing NSW correspondence dated 12 August 2024 and other contextual factors of which the committee is aware, the committee is concerned that such an 'investigation' could be interpreted as a wrongful attempt by Racing NSW to uncover the identity of confidential submission authors, potentially with the intention of discouraging or intimidating these inquiry participants from giving evidence.”
The details of the Racing NSW submission in question have not been made public.
The Select Committee met on August 26 to discuss the matter.
“The committee is concerned that the possible actions inferred in Racing NSW's confidential correspondence dated 12 August 2024 could amount to an attempt to interfere with inquiry participants,” the report read.
“If this interpretation is correct, this would have a substantial and detrimental impact on the ability of this committee to conduct its inquiry, and would be a matter of utmost seriousness.
“Inquiries, and ultimately the committee system as a whole, depends on witnesses and other inquiry participants coming forward to give evidence without fear or favour, free from interference.
“For this reason, committees and the House have always taken very seriously any suggestion that inquiry participants have been interfered with in respect of their evidence, as reflected in the Procedural Fairness Resolution.”
The Report concluded:
“It is the suggestion of the committee that should the House refer the matter to the Privileges Committee, that the Privileges Committee seek submissions from members of the Select Committee.”
The Upper House will now consider the recommendation.
Bren O’Brien
