Senate Economics Legislation Committee, , 2:20:16 to 3:02:44
ASIC answers questions regarding IPO market conduct, the financial stability of Diversa, and whistleblower protections in the transport industry.
Topics: Integrity, Whistleblower protections, Workplace relations
Speakers: Ms Sarah Court, Speaker 4, Senator Dave Sharma, Senator Barbara Pocock, Senator David Pocock, Alan Kirkland, Chris Savundra, Senator Lisa Darmanin, Senator Malcolm Roberts
>> Thank you. And good morning. Um, I had um three different topics, so I'll try and be as quick as I can if if that's right. If you can indulge me if I do move at speed. Um, firstly, Firmus, and thanks for your correspondence on that. uh miscaugh and your confirmation that uh ASICH is making targeted inquiries of the joint lead managers of the thermos IPO. So just for clarity those are the four lead managers Morgan's Bank of America JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley. >> Okay. Um and you mentioned um ASICH has an interest in there being a reasonable basis for representations about investor demand. Um that appropriate records of book building and allocations are kept and that conflicts of interest are managed uh properly. Please feel free to correct me if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly. No, no, I
think that's a fair I'm just look looking at the letter, Senator, but yes, I think that sounds like a fair uh description.
>> Okay. Um, has ASICH um obviously there was no there was no IPO, so there was no prospectus, but has ASIC seen the Pathfinder document or some of the other documents that were circulated to investors?
>> Um, I can't answer that definitively, Senator Sharma, but I assume that we have, of course, and that those will all form part of the um the inquiries that we're making at the moment.
>> Okay. Um are you aware um it's publicly available or it's published in the media that an email that went from um Morgans to um Morgan's brokers to clients on the 5th of October saying that demand has been enormous north of 7.5 billion over 5 billion of available stock. The book closes around lunchtime this Wednesday. So if you wish to participate you need to get a rattle on. Has seen that
correspondence? Um I the team will absolutely have seen it and I think I saw it in the press as well, Senator.
>> Okay. So there needs to be as I understand it um there needs to be a reasonable basis for those representations that are being made there about investor demand.
>> Well, we would certainly be looking at as part of these inquiries um at that kind of correspondence and and also the broader context, Senator Sharma. Sometimes things can be, you know, p pulled out of um a broader correspondence, but um we've got a um we've got a a report that makes very clear that lead managers must must have a reasonable basis for representations about investor demand. So that is one of the things that our inquiries will be considering. I should also clarify, Senator Sharma, I think I saw um a headline this morning that referred to ASICH investigating um thermos and um people often um misunderstand us making preliminary inquiries in a normal course and a formal investigation. So just to make clear for the record at this stage we are making inquiries. We certainly have not opened a formal investigation.
>> No, thank you. And I do understand that and just to assure you I haven't said you're making you're investigating.
>> No, you I noticed your language was
>> I noticed you make making targeted inquiries. Um just on the conflicts of interest because obviously you mentioned that's an area of interest for ASICH as well managing conflicts of interest. There are media reports that um and again they're only media reports so I can't attest to their accuracy that but that um some of the brokers and employees of the broker firms and some of the highly valued clients of the broker firms were um heavily invested in some of the preipo or early stage fundraising rounds. Um and because there were very [clears throat] limited or almost non-existent escrow arrangements for this IPO, there was a risk that um well there was the potential for those holders to be selling into the float and having an interest in obviously getting the float away, talking up the valuation and making um making very large profits off the back of that. Is the management of those potential conflicts of interest is that of interest to ASICH as well?
>> Yeah, I I think it's fair to say, Senator Sharma, and of course, we've seen all of those same media reports um that you are uh citing from. I think it's fair to say that we are having a look um at the broad range of issues that have been reported in the media, including engaging um with the JPM, the JLMs. As I mentioned earlier, I think I almost can't give very much more sitting here today about what we're doing. Um, you know, suffice to say this was a very significant event. Um, we understand that and we need to look at it carefully. Um, and that's what we're
>> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, I'll just move on to another topic if I could. Um, diversa. So um I think you were at the public hearing in Sydney on the 4th of September uh where Diversa appeared before corporations and financial services and you appeared subsequently. Um is ASICH aware whether Diversa is still accepting new members into its funds and does ASICH have any regulatory or legal powers to stop new members going into those funds? My concern here is um is that obviously diverse is facing significant claims including from ASICH that are almost 30 times larger than their equity. Um there are multiple other investigations. There's obviously a risk um of insolveny um and the exposure of not only existing members but new members if they're being taken uh if diverse are still accepting new members. So I just wanted to understand um what's ASEX what are ASEX powers or authorities there and how are you exercising them?
>> Yeah, thanks Senator. It's a it's a good um it's a very fair question. So far as I think I perhaps should take it on notice, but to be as helpful as I can um my understanding is Diversa is not procluded from taking on new members. Um, I'm not sure that ASICH has the power to to impact that. I know APRA is following us and they may be able to answer the question as well, but um I'm not trying to pass the buck. I'm very happy to take to take that away and just but but I understand the point that you have um as as other committees have have examined um the financial situation of Diversa and the potential liability that Diversa faces as a as a result of our action. I you know it's a reasonable question to ask.
>> Okay. when ASICH um cuz I think ASICH made an interim stop order in 2023 preventing Diversa from issuing interests in spaceship super under the design and distribution obligations. Is that an available um power or authority to acid?
>> Sorry, I just couldn't hear. Is that a what? Sorry.
>> Is that an available
>> Oh, a stop order. Yeah. >> Um well, a stop order would normally be and again someone can correct me if I'm wrong. would normally issue um where there's a particular financial product that is about to be issued that we have concerns about. So there might be something in it that we think is misleading or not properly fully disclosed to investors so that we think that if the financial product was issued that um retail investors might be misled or not understand what or it may not be suitable for them. Um and so we would issue a stop order. Normally we'd issue an interim stop order and more often than not the um the entity issuing the product remedies the defections um and then um it it goes it um it is then released. So I I'm not sure that a stop order would be available to us in this circumstance in terms of preventing divers from taking on new members from
>> new members into existing products and
>> funds. Yeah.
>> Did you have something you wish to add
said, I mean those types of stop stock stop orders are often issued under the design and distribution obligation regime and it would be where we've got the a concern with the target market determination that we feel that it's defective and fails to comply with the law. Now, in many of the cases where we've issued those stop orders, um they can then the concerns can be addressed by reissuing the target market determination in a way that addresses our concerns. So it it's commonly an interim measure um that's about defects in the disclosure um documents uh that that firms are often then able to address.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Um how much time have I got? Sh
>> you have got uh two minutes.
one more question on that and then I'll just one final topic in the last minute. What triggers or events would prompt ASICH to assess whether a trustee like Diversa is remains fit to hold an IFSL? What sort of um I know this is somewhat hypothetical, but in analogous situations in the past, when have you what sort of events have prompted you to >> asex powers there?
>> Um Senator, I'm I don't think there's a quick answer. Okay. um to that. Uh so with your uh with your leave, I would like to take that on notice. I mean there there are a range of circumstances in which we um either suspend or cancel an AFSL. It's a obviously it's a very significant thing to do. Yes. >> Um and it is subject to you know procedural fairness and and a whole range of factors and then it's something that um an AIC delegate decision would make based on the available evidence. Now I think um the more the more likely outcome and this is perhaps if I should remove it from diversa particularly in there are circumstances where we would put a put conditions on a on a license for example or remediation programs or plans um and the like. So I think actual license cancellation would would be a last resort and we'd have to think very much about >> um what are the potential impacts on members um that are theirs and and that would be obviously something that APPA would be very involved in and and concerned about is you know how do we how do we make sure that all of those uh current members of the divers trustee funds um are properly um looked after.
>> Okay. All right. if you could just take on notice very happy to think about any situations in the past. Um my final question different topic I've hadn't heard of a number of complaints from suppliers to David Jones about delayed payments and non-payments. Has made any inquiries with either the David Jones or its auditors PWC about solvency?
Uh again, Senator, I know we're aware of the various we are aware of various reports. Obviously, there's been a lot of media discussion um about David Jones and its financial >> position. Um I think again um if if you're comfortable, I'll take that on notice. We can come back to you quickly.
>> Okay. All right. Happy to take that on notice. >> Thank you, Chair.
>> Thanks, PCO. David,
>> uh this morning, I've also got uh three or four things I was keen to try and get through. I want to start by following up on the Binder Bella Christian College matter that we've discussed a number of times. Um the final liquidators report was provided more than a year ago on the 25th of October 2025 and there's still no payment to creditors including uh mom and dad small businesses. has ASCH used your powers under the corporations act to to administratively uh disqualify any former Bindabella Christian College directors?
Thanks for the question, Senator. And as as you say, we've talked about this matter um previously, of course. Um we and because of the um the number of issues, Senator, that you've raised with us. This is a matter where we have gone back on a number of occasions to to doublech checkck our conclusions if if if you like. And it's not an, you know, very conscious of the the significance of this issue. um particularly here in Canberra. Um but we have and we have been engaging with the liquidators um in relation to their findings and um and their report Senator and we have uh remained of the view that we are unable to um that there is insufficient evidence to meet the evidentiary thresholds that we'd need for further investigation and that that extends to action against the directors.
Mhm. And so what about under under section 206F involvement in multiple failed companies? Can ASC not use that?
>> Um in relation to that particular provision again happy to take it on notice, Senator, but I can um I can assure you that we have looked at every uh angle in relation to the Binderella Christian College and its directors. um again because of the um the issues that have been raised to with us
>> and and have you recommended uh their disqualification from ACNC registered
>> I I know that the a sorry I'm getting my acronyms wrong the ACNC um I know it revoked the charity status of Bindabella um back in the middle of last year. Uh I'm not sure if the ACNC is taking action against the directors. >> and the ACNC is the lead regulator in relation to corporate governance breaches because of the status of it as a char as a
So you we had millions and millions of dollars of taxpayer money going to a school ongoing omni shambles of governance failures uh collapse still owing creditors and there's nothing that asset can do in that circumstance. Is it is this a case of the the laws not being um up to scratch and actually allowing
is an example and I I feel like I'm giving this evidence to um senators you know reasonably frequently on a range of different issues where a collapse of some kind or investor funds are lost and there is um what is perceived to be for very good reasons a fundamental breach of our laws whether it be corporate governance laws or misleading deceptive laws, director's duties laws. I am trying to explain why it is difficult for ASICH to take >> legal action in those circumstances. And so what I would say to you in relation to this particular matter that you know we've been talking about um for a couple of years now is that we have looked at all of the information that we can gather. We have looked at the liquidator reports. We have understood what what the liquidators have done. We have engaged with all of the relevant documentation and that we have to reach we have to have evidence available to us that is admissible in court sufficient to found a director's duties um or other corporate governance breach whether it be 206F or otherwise. And that our assessment, the assessment of our um expert um investigators and our internal legal teams is that there is not a matter there is not a case here that we can file take on that we do not meet the evidential threshold. Um
>> and Senator just on the issue of harm um you may have additional information to ourselves but our understanding is that all creditors of Binder Bella either have been or will be paid in full so 100 cents in the dollar um as a result of the administrator's sale um of Bindabella to the Christian communities uh sorry community ministries fees um for $30 million.
>> Sure. But I mean a year later they haven't been paid.
>> Well, I'm happy to follow that up with the liquidators, but our understanding is that um distributions to unsecured creditors was going to commence um earlier this year.
>> Sure. And what about the $10 million of taxpayer money that's gone missing? Do
>> um I can't I can't respond on the detail
of the 10. maybe got a a a separate matter then the the CBL matter um that I've also raised um at estimates um last estimates you told me that this was essentially a private shareholder dispute and there was no new information um I now now understand and I know a former senator um Gary Humphre has written to ASICH as well um and you've received a report from a former director of the company can I confirm that
>> I think that's I think That's right, Senator. Yes. I Well, I I I may have that information.
>> Okay. I'll put some more questions on notice about that then, but
>> I think that's Yeah, that might be the most efficient. Senator,
>> do you know if that former director was
>> I don't have that here. Um Senator I mean for this matter falls in a similar category to the um Bindabella Christian College that I we have done a lot of work and a lot of engagement on it and I know that um you're unhappy with the conclusion that we reached and we >> and that we >> many people are indeed obviously you're representing a broader group. I think my point is that >> these are not issues that we've taken lightly and being dismissive of. They're not issues that we haven't looked at because we've got resources or we're prioritizing elsewhere or anything like that. They are issues that we've looked at um looked at deeply and considered deeply and formed a view uh that there is not a matter for us to take on. But M
court, what's the point of SMMES PL paying ASICH fees every year if it seems like every time something happens with anme there's not much that's done or it's can't be done but you know you clearly either underresourced or it's just not a >> well a focus because it seems like a number of cases where >> most Australians would say that looks a lot like um something that's very concerning or white collar crime and as come back and say well it's either too minor or it's a shareholder dispute where there's nowhere else that these people can turn to and they've been paying you know you fees for for years probably decades.
>> Um Senator I think you've given two examples where ASICH has looked carefully um and over an extended period of time into a particular set of facts and we have concluded um that there is not an action that we uh can take. Um there are a myriad of other matters that ASET has on at any particular time uh responding to similar issues. So I think we've got 56 matters civil matters in court nearly 50 criminal matters in court. You know at any particular time we have a um an extensive um investigation and enforcement portfolio. I think we've started 180 new investigations in the um in the last uh few months alone. So, I appreciate that things that uh look self-evident um people are frustrated uh with where we end up, but um we have a a very busy and extensive program. And just to be completely clear, we it's not that we have not taken these matters further on the basis of resourcing or prioritization or anything like that. We've looked at them carefully and made
an assessment. So, I guess after last estimates, it was brought to my attention that um you potentially had more information um and you told me at the time that you had no new evidence on this CBL matter. So, I'll put some more questions on on notice. Um
>> sorry, s just to understand. So, you're concerned that I we did have new evidence and that I had told you that we had not. Is that what Okay,
>> I'll put some I'll put some stuff on notice about about that. Um
>> you're at 10 minutes
>> and Senator just in response to your earlier question in terms of um the additional reports for minority shareholders. Um so we received um two communications, one on the 8th and then the second was on the 18th of October and we're in the process of considering um those communications.
>> 12 months later was that
>> no of this year. >> This year. Okay. So just um this month.
>> Okay. How much longer do I
>> You're at 10 minutes. Do you have only a couple more? >> otherwise I can rotate and come back.
>> I've got just a couple more on is that all right?
>> If you could be as quick as possible.
>> Uh just on mortgage fraud. Does ASEX mortgage fraud investigation cover businesses and uh business and private loans secured against homes, farms or small businesses?
I'm going to ask Commissioner IO to talk about mortgage fraud.
>> Uh yeah, sorry. Is there a specific aspect of
>> are there any are any types of lending
Uh so uh in relation to mortgage fraud, there's different um sort of scenarios in which that occurs from sort of moneyaundering situation to more people over overstating their um income versus the or understating expenses through to taking money out of different countries. So there's quite a few different um sort of scenarios in which it may occur. So our responsibilities or our investigations might might vary depending on those we when it's in the circumstances where there's potentially money laundering or if it's about whole sort of risk systems then we'd work closely with OSRA and APA. So I think um if if there's a more specific type of issue
>> put some stuff on.
>> Okay. I'd be pleased to help you with
that. Yeah. >> Thank you. Thanks J.
>> Okay. Um Senator PCO the other Senator PCO was >> She's literally run away. Cheeky. Um, do you want to just ask another one? We'll see if we can find her because she's [laughter] been patiently waiting and Oh, here she is. Maybe ask one more, David. And then >> start the timer. >> No, no, I [laughter] haven't. Are you happy to? [clears throat] >> Yes. >> You're okay to start?
>> Thank you. From one pock to another. Um, I wanted to go back to the 55 um complaints that you are pursuing in relation to audit. Um I'm wondering what's happening to the other 500. Have you referred any of the others uh to uh other regulators like the TPB or the ATO or anyone else and and any of the 50 that you're seem to be focusing on?
>> If I can just start by clarifying, Senator, I gave that as an estimate and it was less than. Um so we'll we'll when we've um got to the point of being sure about what numbers are, we'll be like I said by the end of the year proposing to publish a report on what we've seen so far recognizing that there will be further action. It won't be sort of the end end of those um consideration of the issues that are identified. But part of the work that we're doing um now is to the extent there are things that are definitely not within our um responsibilities. Is there are they within someone else's? So um I don't have a definitive answer to you about whether you know how many or when or to whom but that question of is there another regulator or industry sorry professional body. So um if there appears to be a bucket that seem relevant to um can CPA or IPA that's an option like you say the uh TPB. So um to the extent we can appropriately bring concerning information to others attention we will do so
>> and that relates to the entire 551
>> as a process will will make that assessment whether all 500 odd 550 will there will be an avenue to that we can take in relation to them I'm not sure yet but we'll consider that issue if
it's available. So can I ask when you do do your publication it would be very useful to know the distribution of these complaints across different kinds of issues and across the four firms that they relate to. Um do you have a sense of those uh if fewer than 10% of the 551 internal misconduct reports are concern statutory order. Do you have a sense what the other approximately 500 concern? uh specifically I'm interested in when any that or the amount the number that relate to internal audit asset valuation and tax advisory services specifically
that now um it's work that's underway to get a sense of the topics and um like I alluded to earlier we're not kind of going into detail into each of them if they're not associated with our six work so um the level of precision that we'll be able to categorize the others may vary vary. Um, and therefore to the extent we are able to share that information in the future, it might be a range rather than a precise number. And it might be a sense of the issues rather than precision on exactly what the concerns are or aren't just to manage um an expectation about how much information we'll be able to cover. ASC
has publicly raised concerns regarding some80 billion dollars in illquid superanuation assets where auditors obtained limited or no supporting evidence. Uh am I correct that valuations of many of those ilquid untraded assets are derived using discounted cash flow models and other assumptions such that the reported fair value is highly dependent on management estimates and valuation judgments. Yeah,
I think you're referring to the report that we um released a couple of weeks ago in relation to responsible uh sorry registered superanuation entities and that report covered um observations from our work both on the financial reports um prepared and lodged and the audit auditing associated with it and in that report we did call out some concerns and I think you've um cited the numbers there in relation to what we saw as inadequate or incomplete investigative steps taken by the auditors. So uh in relation to the unlisted assets and I'm not sure I can confirm exactly um you refer to discounted cash flows and those sorts of things um without the report here but we did describe what we thought were the gaps >> and we have been um keen to make sure those gaps are closed because um the value those valuations are just absolutely um very important for people to know >> you know what their balance is but also what the fees are and some of the other things that flow from that number being accurate. So yes,
>> so the the foundations of some of those fair valuations are rocky where internal misconduct reports concern asset valuation internal audit or tax advisory services. Is ASICH assessing whether those matters might have implications for the accuracy of corporate or superanuation fund financial reporting?
Yeah, I don't I think if your question is around internal valuation and those things um that may uh in our file reviews we focus very much on the provisions that are within our um regulatory responsibility. So the auditing auditors complying with the standards that apply to them rather than looking at the tax advice received or the internal audit assessment. Um it may be that those issues become apparent when looking at the specific issue that we are responsible for, but we don't have a um a line of sight consistently across tax advice or internal audit as specifically because that's not something that we can respond to. We don't have a regulatory hook to hold someone to account for the quality of that internal audit or the you know the the tax advice would be the tax practitioners board. So I think it goes to doing what we can and I think to your earlier question to the extent if as part of doing what we part of our job we see something that's someone else's responsibility you know that making sure we've got relationships that permit the sharing of information. So given the
concentration of advisory, valuation, tax and audit services within the big four firms, is ASIC concerned that misconduct or quality failures outside statutory audit may pose risks to market integrity that are not presently subject to equivalent regulatory oversight.
Uh so we've discussed in this committee and others the fact that there are very significant limitations on the regulatory framework that apply to audits and I think you'd say that therefore the weight that's put on other frameworks on adjacent activities is important but those that administer those so I would I would say the tax practitioners board would have a meta better sense of the you know how that how that framework is holding up for example rather RA than we we have identified gaps as it applies to audit. We've don't need to rehearse that. We've spoken about it a lot. So that that goes to the firm firm level um regulation of firms that do audit work. You're right to observe that a lot of those firms do those adjacent activities as well. And so to the extent there's policy discussion at the moment around what a framework looks like um to whom it applies, that's an issue that's that's relevant. But our our responsibilities have been and we think are focused on that audit part of it. Um and and and we're really focused on whether the audit part of it has a gap and the firms should be should be regulated.
>> You've you've certainly drawn that to the our attention and to the assistant minister's attention as he's considering reform here. Um okay. There's lots of things that need fixing. It's it's clear. Um, can I ask a couple of questions about Bethl? Um, and I'm interested in hearing a little more about the steps that you're taking and the administr administrators are taking to make sure that workers are paid what they are owed and also what's happening for home buyers and those whose deposit and life savings are on the line in this very, very large collapse.
>> Thanks, Senator. So I think as I said in my opening remarks um this is un unfolding in real time in a sense and I I don't have precise answers for those questions that you've put um sitting here now and but but what I can tell you is that the um there are voluntary administrators who are doing that work to find out what monies have come in um where those monies have gone Um they are also looking for example at where are the deposits that the home buyers uh where are those deposits sitting and what can those deposits be properly used for and should they have been held in trust or were they um there is some discussion I think that the arrangements may have um enabled or permitted Baffler to use those um deposits for other um purposes but there's an awful lot to go um to get there. This is an um an extremely complicated um administration um as I mentioned earlier I think 542 special purpose vehicles so different companies that sit beneath um the head company and what we are really concerned about um Senator and what we're working with the administrators in relation to in particular is trying to ascertain to what extent there might be retail uh investors that are caught up in these private credit funds that have in turn made loans to the Bara Group for the property developments. And then there's this range of different developments. Some of the lenders have come in and taken um taken control of of the development sites and are continuing to develop them and others haven't. So um as I gave evidence to um Senator Kovacic earlier what we've got the BLA group of um issues that we are continue we'll take some time to get to the bottom of um and then we've got the sort of that bigger um interest in private credit generally and those issues about opacity liquidity valuations and the like um that we are continuing to talk about.
>> So it's going to take quite some time to get answers to the questions I'm asking. Can I ask a last and then I'm done. Um around the trade prime scam. >> Sorry. Which >> this is uh tra formerly known as MGF Capital.
>> I see.
>> Um you've confirmed that you're actively investigating a potential scam. I think that has seen at least 138 million in Australian investor funds lost. I'm just my first question is how many former or current authorized representatives of MFG Capital or Trade Prime are under investigation by ASICH over concerns of
So I'll tell you the um information I have got here um Senator and we can expand anything um uh that we need to. MGF Capital holds an AFSL. So it holds an Australian Financial Services license. >> Um we're concerned that it has been participating in what we would call a licency for hire arrangement and that there have been 121 corporate authorized representatives that have been licensed since October 2021. Um we we have a um we have taken down uh websites that are associated with um MGF um and we have a an active investigation um underway and the we have received reports of misconduct. I know there's been some press about this as well. The reports of misconduct we have received have primarily been uh from overseas investors um as things currently stand. And it does appear that $138 million or at least that figure has been invested um into financial services products that [music] investors believed were offered by MGF's cars. Now
>> that's Australian money 138 million is
>> in Australian dollars? But I'm my I I'm assuming that that money is primarily from overseas investors. But I we can clarify that. Um Senator,
>> and how many people have made complaints to the to you on this matter?
I haven't got that figure here, Senator. I we certainly have received some reports of misconduct, as I said, mainly from people based overseas.
>> Okay. Can I I ask for a breakdown? and it might be uh need to be on notice of how many former or current authorized representatives of MGF capital stroke trade prime are under investigation over concerns of those losses. So
>> that on notice, Senator,
>> thank you. Uh and have you explored the possibility of a link between capital guard and main group?
>> Uh I think we have but again it might may be best senator if we give you a more wholesome response on notice. Thank
you. And have you looked into the individual Karim Farage in relation to his links to both of those schemes?
>> Again, I think perhaps if I take that on notice.
>> Okay. Are you concerned um over more broadly about Australian financial services license providers as a whole?
>> that's a very that's a very broad
>> can I just finish this?
>> Sorry. That's a very broad question because obviously there's you know huge numbers of um holders of Australian financial services license throughout the financial system who are operating law lawfully and properly and I I can say though that we are concerned we've seen examples Senator um where somebody has held an Australian financial services license and then have on have sold it to a new entity um and we don't have a lot of visibility um of that and certainly we see examples where firms that have or businesses that have been operating completely properly and appropriately within the law there's a change of ownership of the license and then suddenly issues start to arise. So I think it's fair to say that and we're certainly concerned for example when um when firms who are doing the wrong thing try to provide themselves with legitimacy by claiming everything's all right because we've got an AFSL and we see scam examples of that for example where people try to trade on the fact that they have got a a license um from ASICH uh to uh which really sort of encourages wrongdoing and gives them a veneer of legitimacy that they shouldn't have.
>> So on notice, could you um provide uh the number of providers that are under investigation uh with those kinds of concerns?
>> Do my best, Senator.
>> Thank you. Great. Thanks.
>> Thank you, Senator Roberts.
>> Thank you. Thank you for appearing again. Good to see you.
>> Hello, Senator Roberts.
>> Uh I've got permission to use this woman's name in public. Roxan Msco is a woman you're familiar who held a senior safety role with the company that provided services to Santos in the transport and trucking area. She reported major safety breaches in the heavy transport industry. Claiming whistleblower status. She followed protocol for claiming protections as a whistleblower but has been ignored, treated with retaliation and threatened with violence and denied whistleblower status. I wish to clarify with ASC why she has been denied the protections of a whistleblower and why have her disclosures not been actioned to benefit truck drivers where more than 200 drivers have lost their lives in an industry plagued with safety breaches. My first question is is Santos a regulated entity that offers whistleblower protections to those who follow protocols in reporting breaches by way of having a formal whistleblower
Um, Senator Roberts, we have uh responded on many occasions um previously in relation to these issues. Um, and I'm not sure I have a lot to add to those previous responses. Is your is this question is Santos a corporation that is required to have a whistleblower policy? Just if I can clarify the question. >> Um, I would assume the answer to that
>> Thank you. Uh, doesn't the corporations act define an elig eligible whistleblower to include an employee of a person that supplies goods or services to the regulated entity? In other words, a supplier to Santos.
>> Uh, I would have to take that on notice. I assume that's correct. >> Mr. Mr. Sabundra may be able to help me.
um Miss Miscoco's disclosures to um ECS clients of which and competitors um in our view did not qualify for whistleblower protection as none were made to what the act requires as an eligible recipient under section 1317A of the act. Um, the trial judge also found that Miss Msco's disclosures did not amount to a disclosable matter because the evidence aduced during the trial did not suggest that she had reasonable grounds to suspect that the disclosure concerned misconduct or an improper state of affairs or circumstances in relation to a regulated
Can you explain why her reported safety breaches have have not been investigated by Santos, ECS, National Heavy Transport Regulator, and Safework SA who are all made aware of the safety breaches?
>> I'd need to take that on notice
>> if you could please. What has been done since U Miss MSCO reported the safety breaches to my colleague, Federal MP Glenn Still, Senator Still, when he was undertaking a National Senate inquiry into how dangerous is the uh heavy vehicle transport sector.
>> Really, we we can't answer more questions, Senator, about the transport related safety issues. They're just not within asex uh jurisdiction.
>> Okay. Thank you, chair. Thank you.