Arrest warrants considered as Minns staffers skip explosives inquiry
The threat of arrest now hangs over five of NSW Premier Chris Minns' top advisers after they refused to front a parliamentary inquiry investigating a suspected terror plot.
The five senior ministerial staffers failed to appear before a NSW parliamentary inquiry this morning, prompting the chair of the committee to flag 'further action' in what is fast becoming a major constitutional standoff over executive accountability.
The Legislative Council inquiry, chaired by independent MLC Rod Roberts, commenced at 10.45am on Friday but was forced to adjourn for 30 minutes after none of the five summoned witnesses, senior advisers to Premier Chris Minns and Police Minister Yasmin Catley, arrived.
The hearing was ultimately abandoned without a vote, after Chair Roberts formally acknowledged the no-show and delivered a lengthy statement criticising the government's ongoing resistance to the inquiry.
'I am disappointed in the government's continued efforts to hinder and frustrate the work of this committee, and ultimately, the role of the Legislative Council to scrutinise the actions of government,' Mr Roberts said.
'The committee will now consider further action in relation to these witnesses under section 7 through 9 of the Parliamentary Evidence Act 1901.'
Those summoned included Mr Minns' chief of staff, James Cullen; two senior advisers from the Premier's office, Edward Ovadia and Sarah Michael; and two staffers from Minister Catley's office, Dr Tilly South and Ross Neilson.
Their appearance was meant to shed light on who in government knew what, and when, regarding the discovery of an explosives-laden caravan in Sydney's northwest in January.
The Premier had previously described the incident as a potential 'mass casualty event'. Although the Australian Federal Police later determined it was part of a criminal conspiracy.
The circumstances surrounding the government's response, and whether MPs passed sweeping anti-hate laws in February based on incomplete information, remain under intense scrutiny.
A letter sent to the committee chair on Thursday and signed by the five staffers outlined their refusal to appear. They argued that attending would breach 'the principles of ministerial accountability and comity between the Houses of Parliament,' particularly while a separate privileges inquiry by the Legislative Assembly is ongoing.
The group also took aim at Mr Roberts' earlier media comments, writing:
'Given your comments on breakfast radio yesterday as to the motivation for issuing the summonses, – which make it clear we are 'proxies' because our respective Ministers cannot be compelled as witnesses to the Select Committee – we also consider that they have not
been properly issued,' the letter read.
'In light of the above, we invite you not to press for our attendance at the hearing tomorrow.'
Mr Roberts rejected those arguments in his closing statement, asserting the inquiry is properly constituted and that ministerial staff are not exempt from appearing.
'The inquiry seeks to examine the actions of the executive, not members of the Legislative Assembly,' he said.
'The committee is not seeking to sanction ministerial staff for their actions, only to shed lights on the events in the lead-up to the passage of the hate speech and protest laws through parliament.
'The power of committees to summon witnesses and compel them to attend and give evidence is in black and white in the Parliamentary Evidence Act. It is not in doubt.'
Local Government Minister Ron Hoenig has previously condemned the inquiry as 'an incursion upon the privilege' of the Legislative Assembly.
'It expressly seeks to scrutinise the discourse of the House, the conduct of its members, be it backbencher or a member of the executive government, while undertaking the primary function entrusted upon them by their constituents which is to legislate,' Mr Hoenig said during Question Time in May.
He argued the Legislative Council had overstepped its bounds by summoning ministerial staff and attempting to examine lower house proceedings.
Despite the controversy, the Legislative Assembly passed a motion 47 to 27 to refer the inquiry's terms to the Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics.
In response, Mr Roberts amended the inquiry's terms to narrow its focus to the passage of relevant bills through the upper house. Mr Hoenig, however, insisted the changes 'did not go far enough'.
Opposition MP Alister Henskens said the amendments were sufficient to avoid breaching privilege and labelled the referral motion 'a transparent attempt to frustrate and delay the upper house inquiry'.
Greens MP Jenny Leong said it was 'critical' that the Legislative Council was not prevented from doing its work, warning that any 'unreasonable delay' would raise concerns about the Premier and executive trying to 'subvert' the inquiry.
Speaker Greg Piper defended the committee's progression, saying the changes were not intended to obstruct but instead 'an opportunity to actually examine the issue, the rights and privilege, the exclusive cognisance of the Legislative Assembly'.
The committee has previously heard from senior police officials, including NSW Police Commissioner Karen Webb and Deputy Commissioner David Hudson.
With Friday's hearing abandoned and potential legal action looming, the inquiry is now at a crossroads.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
‘Diabolical' twist after Aussie woman vanishes
Sally Leydon believed her mum was dead long before Magistrate Teresa O'Sullivan handed down her findings on the matter in February 2024. Still, to hear those words nearly three decades after she first went missing, without any indication of how or why or where she died, was a heavy, heavy moment. '2024 is one of the worst years I've had in my life actually,' Sally told Gary Jubelin's I Catch Killers podcast this week. 'Being told that your mother is deceased, and then having to work out the next steps in that as a missing person case that is convoluted and confusing … it has been an absolute diabolical time for me.' Sally last saw her mother, Marion Barter, in 1997, just before the 51-year-old schoolteacher dramatically quit her job to travel overseas. A dead phone line, and mysterious bank transactions On August 1, Sally received a phone call from her mum, who told her she was calling from a payphone in Tunbridge Wells in the UK. The pair talked about Sally's upcoming wedding, but were cut off when the pay phone went dead. It was the last time Sally would ever speak to Marion, though it was later discovered that the missing woman did return to Australia under a different name just a day later. Unbeknown to anyone, it was later discovered that in May Marion had changed her name to 'Florabella Natalia Marion Remakel' and obtained a passport under that name. This was the name she used while flying back into Australia in August 1997. At the time, though, Sally had assumed her mum was still overseas, but when she hadn't heard from her for another few months, she called Marion's bank – only to discover that money was being withdrawn from her account in Byron Bay. 'We drove straight to Byron Bay Police and I walked in there and said, 'something's wrong',' Sally recalls. Then, in a mistake she says still haunts her, Sally didn't take down the name of the officer she spoke with. She didn't ask for an event number – she just assumed the police would begin investigating. 'I hope other people learn from this: you make sure you take down every single detail,' she told Jubelin. 'Because I didn't remember the name of the guy who gave me the report. I didn't get a business card. I didn't get to make an official statement. I literally just told him everything, thinking that that was how you do it.' 'She doesn't want anyone knowing where she is' Then, 10 days later, when Sally was back at home, she got a phone call. 'My memory is that it was the same person that I had spoken to at the front desk [of the police station] but I can't prove that because I didn't write anything down,' she laments. 'But that phone call was a gentleman calling me to tell me that they'd found my mother and she didn't want anything to do with us,' Sally continues. 'His exact words were: we found your mother. She doesn't want anyone knowing where she is or what she's doing.' Police have since confirmed to Sally that they never spoke to or saw her mother Marion. The identity of the person that made that call is a mystery, and tragically, Sally's brother took his own life shortly after hearing that piece of news. 'He had his own issues and demons he was working through, but he was about to get married,' Sally explains. 'He was in a very good head space and in my heart, I think he did not cope very well when he was told that.' A daughter's mission In the intervening 27 years since her disappearance, Sally has not stopped searching for answers – unearthing a series of bizarre twists and turns along the way that have reshaped the way she thinks about her mother's disappearance. Hindered by a police investigation that the coronial inquest in 2024 deemed 'inadequate', Sally has taken on much of the investigation and advocacy into her mother's case herself, launching a podcast about the disappearance entitled The Lady Vanishes in 2019. One of the most compelling pieces of evidence Sally uncovered in the course of her podcast was the involvement of her mother with a man named Ric Blum (among other aliases), shortly before she left for her overseas trip. Blum has denied any involvement in Marion's disappearance, and maintains they ceased their romantic involvement shortly before she travelled overseas. Magistrate O'Sullivan found in the 2024 inquest that Blum had lied and deceived the inquest, based on evidence surrounding his travel history (which lined up with that of Marion), as well as the testimony of several other women with whom Blum had allegedly had relationships with. O'Sullivan found Marion had been 'exploited' by Blum. She said she was 'convinced' that Blum 'does indeed know more' but did not recommend charges against him. The magistrate recommended the NSW police commissioner ensure the investigation of Barter's disappearance is referred to or remains within the state crime command 'unsolved homicide team' for ongoing investigation. 'I have to keep going' In spite of the toll the investigation has taken on Sally, she is committed to providing a 'voice' for her mother, and other missing persons. 'I feel like I didn't really want to leave that burden of searching for her for my children,' Sally explains. 'I've got three children and that's their grandmother. They never met her. She'd already disappeared by the time I had babies. I'm actually 52 now, and the coroner has deemed that at the time she passed, Mum was 52 as well. 'My eldest daughter Ella is 23, about to turn 24, and I was 23, turning 24 when Mum disappeared. So in our world, we've actually come full circle in life again. Ella is the same age as I was, and I'm the same age as mum was, and we still don't know what's happened to her. And so I'll keep going.'
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Aussie sailor, adviser to Finland had genital herpes during stealthing charges, court hears
EXCLUSIVE A Sydney to Hobart sailor and Australian adviser to Finland failed to tell his sexual partner he had genital herpes before taking his condom off midway through sex because he 'couldn't feel anything', a court has heard. Anssi Paatero, 39, is awaiting sentencing in the NSW District Court after pleading guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent. On June 6, the court heard how Paatero had sex with the woman aged in her 30s after attending a function at a Sydney sailing club and took the condom off midway through the act without her consent – an act known as stealthing. Two days later, he also told the victim he had genital herpes and that she would need to get tested. Paatero has raced in multiple high-profile Australian sailing events, including several Sydney to Hobarts. Prior to his sentencing hearing, Paatero was also the vice-president of the Finland Australia Chamber Of Commerce – an organisation which advises on trade and business between the two nations. He has since resigned from the organisation. The court heard how after leaving the function, the victim asked Paatero if he had condoms on him at about 1am before buying some herself at a local convenience store. Court documents state that while the pair were in the taxi back to her house, she gave the condoms to the offender saying: 'Here I bought these. You take them.' 'During the sexual intercourse and whilst they were on the bed, the offender said to the victim,' Can I finish inside you? Meaning could he ejaculate inside her. The victim agreed, assuming he still had the condom on,' the court documents stated. 'As the offender ejaculated the victim realised that the accused was not wearing a condom as she could feel him ejaculate inside her vagina. She asked him where the condom was. The offender replied: 'I removed it. I couldn't feel anything.' The next day, the victim messaged the offender stating: 'I will say I thought a lot about needing to get tested today. Won't lie, very unhappy about that.' Paatero asked if he could cook her a 'semi-apologetic dinner' later that week before sharing some websites with her about testing clinics in the area. 'Appreciate the research,' the victim responded. 'I'll just go to [a] regular doctor.' Victim learns about 'stealthing' offence Two days after the incident, the victim spoke to a female friend, who told her it was a criminal offence, court documents state. The victim attended her GP to be tested and Googled 'removing condom during sex' on the internet and became aware of 'stealthing'. The victim then texted Paatero a Wikipedia page about stealthing. 'Don't worry. I'm not going to do anything but it's a really sh** thing to do. My point is … don't do it to anyone,' she wrote. Paatero replied: 'Thank you for sharing this with me. All that is now well acknowledged with a shock. 'While apologies are in order from me to you, I would like an opportunity to discuss in person about shared responsibility, as I trust neither of us wants [to] actively work towards destroying a promising future after we shared also positive experiences together. 'I remember you saying you're pro no-drama. Please let me know.' The victim responded: 'Cannot lie, I feel super sh**ty about this. I am sorry.' Paatero said: 'That's a mature response. I see no reason to discuss further. Just thought I should educate you. I have to wait 6 weeks for blood tests. You'll hear from me if I have anything to share.' The pair then spoke on the phone where the victim stated: 'It is an offence you can't be doing this to people. If you do it to someone else. They will report you.' Paatero then told her about his genital herpes. 'Since you were honest with me, I'll be honest with you,' he said on the phone. 'You know how people get cold sores? Well I have it down there.' The victim responded: 'Are you freaking kidding me, you're telling me that you have genital herpes and you removed the condom knowing you have it?' Paatero told her there was 'so much stigma' behind the disease. 'People live with it and have happy lives,' he told her. The victim ended the phone call and Paatero messaged her. 'Hi. Tried to call you back. Dear God I feel terrible,' Paatero wrote. The victim told him she felt 'literally sick'. 'I am truly sorry and I now fear for my life,' Paatero told her. The victim told him what he had done was 'completely f**ked up'. 'You realise you will change my life if you've give me that,' she said. The victim then reported the matter to police. Paatero continued to message the victim. 'I trusted you enough to tell you the most intimate secret after you reassured me with friendly relations,' he said. 'For what it is worth, I too once was given it by a partner and I was able to forgive them. I wish for us to stay as friends and I hope to be able to support you in any way.' The victim asked Paatero to stop contacting him. Police arrested Paatero the next day – three days after the incident. Court documents state Paatero made 'a number of admissions to police' in body-worn video. Paatero told police he was worried he removed the condom as he wasn't 'pleasing her.' 'I remember telling her that I lost erection and I can't feel her. And the type of person I am, I was worried about you know not being able to please her,' he told police. 'I'm not sure if I told her if I removed the condom, but it was without any malicious intent, it was in the good intention of being able to please her.' The police officer asked Paatero why he decided to remove the condom and have sex with the victim whilst 'knowingly infected with genital herpes'. Paatero responded: 'Being drunk and stupid and not thinking straight, in the heat of the moment.' Former CYCA commodore provides reference letter During his sentencing hearing, Paatero's lawyer Paul Hogan told the court his client had been 'unable to go interstate' to work as a professional sailor due to his bail conditions. He also argued Paatero had saved the court time as he changed his plea to guilty before going to trial. Mr Hogan also submitted several character witnesses for Paatero, including former Cruising Yacht Club of Australia commodore David Kellett AM. Mr Kellet said the offender was a 'fine young man' with 'very high moral standards' who he had worked with on the yacht Sydney. 'I had no hesitation in entertaining Anssi at our home and aboard the yacht and in the yacht club in the company of my wife and daughter. 'Indeed, we have several women in our crew which Anssi treats with the utmost respect.' A reference was also submitted from executive board member Sanna Ruuskanen from the Finland Australia Chamber of Commerce, who said Paatero was 'well-regarded' in the Nordic business community in Australia. Crown solicitor Roger Murray argued this case was unique in that Paatero had a good upbringing and had forged a 'successful career in sailing' and other 'sporting endeavours'. 'It's usually the inverse of what we normally see,' Judge William Fitzsimmons said. Judge Fitzsimmons said the victim made clear she wanted Paatero to use a condom as she had gone to the lengths of asking him and purchasing the condoms at 1am prior to the sexual encounter. Judge Fitzsimmons also said he has not yet decided whether Mr Paatero, who donned an Australia and Finnish flag pin during the hearing, will be facing full-time custody as a result of his offending. The court also heard Sydney is yet to have a sentencing for the charge of stealthing, which was brought in to NSW legislation in 2023. The first conviction for the charge was in Wollongong in 2023 for a different offender. He will be sentenced on August 1.
News.com.au
6 hours ago
- News.com.au
‘Had to wait': TikToker's horror ING ordeal
A Melbourne woman was left without money for two days after ING suspended her account for what they deemed to be 'suspicious activity'. In an ordeal that has left her switching banks, Katie McMaster posted to TikTok after being left without access to her card and unable to withdraw money due to a flag on her account. She said she was initially sent an email on Tuesday, telling her that her accounts had been suspended and she needed to verify her identity. Ms McMaster called ING to verify the email was legit, where she was told she would need to wait up to two days for the fraud team to get back to her. 'They said I need to wait for the fraud team to contact me. I can't speak to them, they wouldn't transfer me to them, I had to wait for them to email me,' she said in the video. After two days – and calling ING multiple times – Ms McMaster finally had her accounts unsuspended. She said the fraud team told her there was just 'one person' managing the fraud inbox. Speaking to Ms McMaster said the 'suspicious activity' turned out to be a transfer with her friend for payment of a Usher ticket. 'I don't know if my TikTok helped, but suddenly, they moved pretty quickly,' she said. Ms McMaster said the verification process as a whole did not feel secure. 'They're sending you emails but then when you ring them and you're on hold, they say ING will never ask you to provide verification via email,' she said. She also said she did not have the option to go into a branch, as there are none in Melbourne. 'It was frustrating just waiting, I probably wouldn't have minded so much if they kept me in the loop,' she said. Ms McMaster said she is now moving banks after being with ING for more than a decade due to the ordeal, with many users on TikTok commenting about similar experiences. A spokeswoman for ING said the bank does place temporary 'holds' on an account if the bank detects 'suspicious transactions'. 'This often involves temporarily placing a hold on a customer's account until we can confirm the transactions with the customer,' she said. 'We recognise that temporarily pausing activity on an account can impact customers, so we always check they have access to essential funds, ensuring they are not placed in financial hardship.'
