The NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption is examining allegations that prohibited political donations were funnelled through third parties to support the Liberal-aligned, right-wing faction NSW Reformers and advance the interests of fugitive property developer Jean Nassif. The inquiry has put the machinery of political influence on display: companies, sham invoices and consulting agreements allegedly used to disguise donations, with Catholic Schools NSW named in the mix.
Who Gets Protected
The people at the bottom of this arrangement are the ones left to absorb the rot. The commission has heard that members of the Reformers used companies, sham invoices and consulting agreements to disguise political donations, including payments allegedly channelled through Catholic Schools NSW. That’s the shape of the system here: money moves through layers of intermediaries, while the public gets the bill for the damage done by private influence dressed up as ordinary business.
The inquiry is also examining allegations involving lobbyist Jeremy Greenwood's former company, Beckington, which is alleged to have been used to disguise political donations as payments for lobbying and government relations work. The language is bureaucratic. The function is simple. Hide the donation, protect the faction, keep the pipeline open.
At the inquiry's first hearing last month, a text exchange was shown in which Mr Greenwood told Jean-Claude Perrottet: "Hey, so you know I'm good to you and help you and give you your filthy schools money and put up with you f***ing whinging." Mr Perrottet replied, "Don't put that in writing." Mr Greenwood then responded, "It deletes."
That exchange sat at the center of the hearing’s most revealing moment. Counsel assisting the commissioner, Peggy Dwyer SC, alleged the money referred to payments from Catholic Schools NSW intended to fund Liberal Party recruitment work. Dr Dwyer had previously said the exchange would form part of the evidence the commission would rely on to argue main Reformers players knew "sham arrangements" were used.
The Paper Trail They Didn’t Want
Jean-Claude Perrottet is the brother of former NSW premier Dominic Perrottet and was a member of the Reformers faction. The inquiry heard that he deleted the message from his phone. That detail matters because the whole arrangement depends on distance, deniability and the hope that the record disappears before anyone with power has to answer for it.
On his third day of evidence, Mr Greenwood said it was a "stupid joke" with a friend about something that would "make him nervous to hear". Dr Dwyer asked, "You knew it was, in your words, filthy schools money, because that was a dodgy arrangement where you were passing on money from Catholic Schools that was intended to fund his recruitment work for the Liberal Party, correct?" Mr Greenwood replied, "No … Look, it's a stupid joke. I rile him up all the time … I regret it, because it's become prominent here, but it's just our relationship."
The commission also heard that Mr Perrottet travelled to Fiji to avoid giving evidence in a 2023 parliamentary inquiry, with "financial assistance from others named" in the allegations. Mr Greenwood told the ICAC on Wednesday he paid for the trip to help him avoid being summonsed. That’s not public service. That’s evasion with a receipt.
What They Call Order
The hearing also heard that a security guard organised by former Labor councillor Sharangan Maheswaran — and likely paid by Mr Nassif's company — was stationed outside his home to help him avoid being contacted by process servers. The apparatus doesn’t just move money. It also helps people disappear when the questions get too close.
Over his three days of evidence, Mr Greenwood was often challenged over his inability to recall evidence put to him, with presiding Commissioner Fabian Gleeson SC forced to step in on multiple occasions to direct him to answer questions. On Wednesday, the hearing became tense when Mr Greenwood faced questions about his dealings with Catholic Schools NSW. When Dr Dwyer challenged his account of payments made to Mr Perrottet, Mr Greenwood turned to someone in the hearing room and said, "Don't give me that look".
Commissioner Gleeson responded, "Just everyone pause. Mr Greenwood, you need to be respectful in the way in which you behave. You need to listen to counsel's questions. You do not direct comments to other people sitting in this room. Do you understand what is expected of you as a witness?" Mr Greenwood apologised but said he was reacting to people making faces at him. Commissioner Gleeson replied, "Mr Greenwood, can you answer the question? Listen to the question and answer it. Do you understand what is expected of you in terms of the respectful conduct and decorum in this room?"
The language of decorum hangs over the whole thing like a cheap curtain. Behind it sits the same old hierarchy: factional operators, lobbyists, developers, and institutions allegedly used as conduits for influence. The commission is forcing the record into the open, one awkward answer at a time.