Key Concessions Made in Corruption Watchdog’s Inquiry

Former Parramatta council CEO Gail Connolly has made three significant concessions during extensive questioning by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). Ms. Connolly, who faced the longest period of scrutiny among 17 witnesses summoned over a six-week investigation into alleged corruption at the City of Parramatta Council, described the public hearings as “the Spanish Inquisition.”

Central Role in ‘Pink Ladies’ Network Investigation

Her testimony proved crucial in detailing personal connections within a group of women known as the “Pink Ladies” or “Pink Ops.” Among her closest associates were senior executives Roxanne Thornton and Angela Jones-Blayney. All three women face accusations of corruption, including allegations of manipulating recruitment processes to favor friends and, in one instance, a family member.

During seven days of evidence, Ms. Connolly largely denied the allegations. These claims included accusations of interfering in hiring to help friends secure council positions, orchestrating secret deals totaling $1.3 million to remove staff, and conducting surveillance on employees’ emails and an elected councillor.

Undermining Interview Processes

Evidence presented indicated that Ms. Jones-Blayney received interview questions in advance. These questions were reportedly sent by Ms. Connolly to the Office of the Lord Mayor and CEO group manager, Ms. Thornton, who then forwarded them to Ms. Jones-Blayney, an executive director.

Ms. Connolly, who was part of the interview panel, initially told the commission she believed the questions were distributed to all candidates. However, under further questioning from counsel assisting, Joanna Davidson SC, she conceded that “the interview process was fundamentally undermined by the provision of that material by a panel member to one interviewee.”

Family Hiring and Staff Surveillance Allegations

Ms. Connolly also faced questions regarding the hiring of her niece, Leah Senkowski, who previously worked for a paint-and-sip company before joining the council. While maintaining she was not directly involved in her niece’s hiring process, Ms. Connolly acknowledged asking her about a potential job, editing her CV, and forwarding it to the council’s chief people and culture officer.

The surveillance of council employees was another key area explored. Ms. Connolly stated that while independent councillor Kellie Darley was frequently the subject of complaints, this differed from conducting unauthorized or random searches of email platforms or phone records.

Justin Mulder, the council’s former chief of staff who later ran for council elections, was the subject of an anonymous email sent by Ms. Connolly to the media, accusing him of timesheet fraud. Ms. Connolly’s lawyer, Callan O’Neill, suggested this was an attempt to remove Mr. Mulder from a position of influence. Ms. Connolly rejected this proposition.

Inappropriate Text Messages and Dishonesty Accusations

Furthermore, Ms. Connolly conceded that text messages sent to Ms. Jones-Blayney were inappropriate, specifically regarding the divulgence of details about another employee’s application for a position for which Ms. Jones-Blayney was also a candidate. “I shouldn’t have said that,” Ms. Connolly commented on their conversation.

Intense Cross-Examination and Admissions

During the cross-examination by City of Parramatta Council’s lawyer, Arthur Moses SC, Ms. Connolly was challenged on her testimony. Mr. Moses questioned her about potential repercussions following a council change, to which Ms. Connolly admitted there was a “high likelihood” of her being sacked after the election.

Mr. Moses accused Ms. Connolly of lying, deliberate deception, and misleading the commission. Under intense questioning regarding an anonymous email, Ms. Connolly eventually admitted to lying to the Lord Mayor of the Council, stating, “That’s correct.”

Accusations were also made that Ms. Connolly hid deeds of release for council employees from elected councillors, believing she was above them. Ms. Connolly denied this, citing legal advice that prevented her from sharing them.

Contract Signature Dispute

The truthfulness of Ms. Connolly’s testimony was a central focus. When asked if she understood the “ridiculousness of the evidence,” she responded, “It’s the Spanish Inquisition.” Mr. Moses also alleged dishonest conduct and the forging of Ms. Thornton’s signature on Ms. Connolly’s council contract. Ms. Connolly had previously claimed Ms. Thornton granted permission over FaceTime to use her wet ink signature, while Ms. Thornton testified she only permitted an e-signature.

Mr. Moses concluded by suggesting Ms. Connolly’s entire tenure at the council, from signing her contract to her current testimony, was “mired with corruption.”

The ICAC has taken a recess to review the substantial volume of evidence gathered.