MR WOODWARD: Mr Conway, those two microphones you have before 20
you, the one on your left is a recording one, and the one 21
on your right is the one that amplifies. So it might be 22
perhaps easier for you and for us if you’re talking into 23
that one more than the other. 24
MR CONWAY: Certainly. Thank you. 25
MR WOODWARD: Thank you. Mr Conway, you were appointed as the 26
– or your current position is as the principal of Kings 27
Park Primary School, is that correct? 28
MR CONWAY: Not correct. 29
MR WOODWARD: Not? Okay. 30
MR CONWAY: I have retired. 1
MR WOODWARD: When did you retire? 2
MR CONWAY: February this year. 3
MR HILL: February of this year? 4
MR CONWAY: Mmm. 5
MR WOODWARD: All right. So until February this year you were 6
the principal of Kings Park Primary School? 7
MR CONWAY: That’s correct. Yes. 8
MR WOODWARD: Thank you. And you have held that position – 9
you had held that position since 1998? 10
MR CONWAY: Correct. Yes. 11
MR WOODWARD: Yes. And prior to that you held a number of 12
other positions as a principal? 13
MR CONWAY: Yes. 14
MR WOODWARD: Yes. Could you take us through those briefly? 15
So it was immediately before Kings Park? 16
MR CONWAY: Immediately before Kings Park would be Brunswick 17
North Primary School? 18
MR WOODWARD: Yes. As principal? 19
MR CONWAY: Yes, as principal. Yes. 20
MR WOODWARD: And before that? 21
MR CONWAY: Before that I was six months assistant principal 22
at Coburg North. And then I was the equivalent of the 23
assistant principal at Brunswick North West for four 24
years – or three and a half years. Before that I was 25
principal at Fawkner Primary School, and before that I 26
was acting principal at Rosebank Primary School, I think 27
it was, for one and a half years. 28
MR WOODWARD: Okay. And you have been with the department in 29
one capacity or another since 1967? 30
MR CONWAY: Well, ’65 if you count the studentship in those 1 days. 2 MR WOODWARD: Yes. 3 MR CONWAY: So 50 years. 4
MR WOODWARD: Now, you, I understand had some, well, at least 5
some knowledge of Mr Nino Napoli from about the early 6
1980s, is that correct? 7
MR CONWAY: Probably late 80s more likely ... have a vague 8
recollection, but yes. 9
MR WOODWARD: And you – those – your dealings with him, did 10
they increase over the years? 11
MR CONWAY: Yes, I participated in – I was a member of the 12
Victorian Primary Principals Association. 13
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 14
MR CONWAY: And around the time Jeff Kennett came to office 15
there was a proposal to introduce school global funding 16
where 90 per cent of the funding was to go directly to 17
schools. It was a new initiative. Nino Napoli was part 18
of the department’s finance section responsible for 19
developing, I suppose, and implementing that initiative 20
and I was a member of a reference group of principals and 21
key stakeholders involved in that project. 22
MR WOODWARD: And that was, among other things, was it – 23
included, I understand, a trip that you attended with a 24
number of other principals and other officers from the 25
department to Edmonton in Canada where they had had a 26
similar system running? 27
MR CONWAY: Yes. Evidently, the system adopted was based on 28
the Edmonton system and it was proposed to the 29
government, as I understand, by Professor Brian Corbel 30
from Melbourne University, and he was the – I suppose, 1
the consultant – the independent consultant and then 2
there were – the department set up a committee to 3
investigate and assist with feedback into how it could be 4
adapted to suit Victorian circumstances. 5
MR WOODWARD: And on that trip, as I say, were a number of 6
other principals, including Mr Peter Paul - - - 7
MR CONWAY: Correct, yes. 8
MR WOODWARD: - - - who, at the time, was the principal of 9
Cowes Primary School. 10
MR CONWAY: Yes. And he – I think he was also president of 11
the Victorian Principal’s Association. 12
MR WOODWARD: Yes. And Mr Jeff Rosewarne was on that trip? 13
MR CONWAY: Yes. 14
MR WOODWARD: Yes. And what was his position at the time? 15
MR CONWAY: I think he was the person in charge of the 16
financial implementation of the project; development of 17
the mechanics of it, I suppose. 18
MR WOODWARD: And so it was in that capacity, namely as a 19
member of that association, that you then had more 20
frequent dealings with Mr Napoli? 21
MR CONWAY: Correct, yes. 22
MR WOODWARD: And that continued, didn’t it, up until – or 23
until 2013 through your membership of the workforce 24
bridging committee. 25
MR CONWAY: Yes. Sometime in 2000, I was appointed to the 26
workforce bridging panel. It’s an advisory panel, yes. 27
MR WOODWARD: And that’s an advisory panel to assist 28
particularly schools that are struggling to meet budget; 29
is that - - - 30
MR CONWAY: Well, it’s a principal’s responsibility to keep a 1
school in surplus and unfortunately some schools run into 2
deficit. And if – they could then apply for what was 3
called workforce bridging. If the school was in deficit 4
because of a decision made by the principal, in terms of 5
staffing, then they would be ineligible to receive 6
workforce bridging. However, if it was as a result of a 7
sudden, unexpected fall in enrolment forecast – you 8
forecast 1000 kids, you got 900, you’ve employed staff to 9
– for 1000 kids, you would – could be left with a 10
deficit. So our job was to review applications made by 11
principals and to make recommendation to whether they 12
would be eligible to receive funding from the department. 13
MR WOODWARD: And Mr Napoli had a role in relation to that 14
committee? 15
MR CONWAY: He chaired that committee, but was often not 16
present due to other commitments. 17
MR WOODWARD: Right. But you did see him from time to time in 18
that period? 19
MR CONWAY: Yes. Usually I would see him when he was present, 20
yes. 21
MR WOODWARD: Yes. And I think you said, or agreed that that 22
continued until around 2013? 23
MR CONWAY: Yes. 2012/13, I think - - - 24
MR WOODWARD: Mr - - - 25
MR CONWAY: - - - I was – anyway. Go on. 26
MR WOODWARD: Thank you. Mr Conway, have you discussed this 27
investigation with anyone, that is, the IBAC 28
investigation in the last 12 to 18 months? 29
MR CONWAY: Not – no. I haven’t discussed the investigation, 30
no. 1
MR WOODWARD: What, not even with a family member? 2
MR CONWAY: With – sorry – yes. With family, yes, yes. 3
MR WOODWARD: Yes. Have you discussed it with anyone else in 4
the department? 5
MR CONWAY: No. 6
MR WOODWARD: Okay. And you’ve – in particular - - - 7
MR CONWAY: Sorry. I – when I appeared for the interview – 8
investigation interview, I contacted the industrial 9
officer to advise I was to be interviewed and he gave me 10
a number to ring in the department. So I did speak to 11
the – is it the – I can’t think of his name. He was 12
responsible for - - - 13
MR WOODWARD: Coordinating that process? 14
MR CONWAY: Yes, yes. And I spoke to that person and they 15
just gave – processed information. 16
MR WOODWARD: And I suppose most particularly, you have not 17
had any conversations with either Mr Napoli or Mr 18
Rosewarne in relation to the investigation in that 19
period? 20
MR CONWAY: No conversations with those at all. 21
MR WOODWARD: Have you spoken to either of them in any other 22
context in the last 18 months or so? 23
MR CONWAY: I think I rang Mr Napoli when I heard – I had been 24
overseas – I heard that he had suffered a stroke or 25
something to that effect, and I did ring to see how he 26
was. 27
MR WOODWARD: Right. 28
MR CONWAY: But there was no – it was a very brief discussion 29
and no discussion about – I wasn’t aware of the IBAC 30
investigation when I spoke to him. 1
MR WOODWARD: Right. Did he say anything to you at that time 2
about the process by which, we will come to in a moment, 3
that your school was sent invoices for payment by him? 4
MR CONWAY: No. 5
MR WOODWARD: And that would have been, what, would it, early 6
last year when you had that conversation? 7
MR CONWAY: Yes, I - - - 8
MR WOODWARD: Early to mid last year. 9
MR CONWAY: It would have been early last year, I would have 10
thought. Yes. 11
MR WOODWARD: Yes, thank you. 12
MR CONWAY: Early to mid probably, yes. 13
MR WOODWARD: You’re familiar with the term banker school? 14
MR CONWAY: I am, yes. 15
MR WOODWARD: How would you define a banker school, Mr Conway? 16
MR CONWAY: Well, the – the only two institutions that can 17
hold bank accounts were the Department centrally, and 18
schools. 19
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 20
MR CONWAY: So regions, districts, anybody else in between 21
couldn’t hold accounts. 22
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 23
MR CONWAY: So money used to be deposited on behalf of the 24
Department into schools to cover the expenditure and 25
programs that the centre didn’t want to handle, or wanted 26
the schools to handle on their behalf. 27
MR WOODWARD: As I understand your evidence, Mr Conway, that 28
was because, for instance, of – if money was required to 29
be used for a program in a region, it couldn’t be given 30
to the region because it didn’t have the administrative 1
capability to manage that money. So it was put into a 2
school within that region. Is that - - - 3
MR CONWAY: That’s correct. 4
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 5
MR CONWAY: The region had a budget and then that budget was 6
allocated sometimes between three schools, as I 7
understand it, or one school. 8
MR WOODWARD: Do we take it from that though, Mr Conway, that, 9
generally speaking, the – when that occurred, the money 10
was being, in the first place, allocated in respect of a 11
specific program? 12
MR CONWAY: It was like a recurrent – recurrent budget. So it 13
was a recurrent thing. So that it was a pay – paid on an 14
annual basis. So regional budget would be distributed on 15
an annual basis and maybe topped up if it was for any 16
other special project for things. So it was an ongoing 17
arrangement I suppose. So, well, in my evidence to the 18
investigation I was describing a banker school in the 19
context of ongoing funding arrangements. 20
MR WOODWARD: Yes. But, again, it was a process pursuant to 21
which money that was to be expended within a region as 22
part of a program, maybe a - - - 23
MR CONWAY: Certainly. 24
MR WOODWARD: - - - maybe of a current program in that region, 25
would then be deposited in a school as a matter of 26
administrative convenience - - - 27
MR CONWAY: Correct, yes. 28
MR WOODWARD: - - - for the management of that money within 29
that region. 30
MR CONWAY: Yes, yes. 1
MR WOODWARD: And is it also the case that, generally 2
speaking, the school that would be the recipient of the 3
money had some connection with the program that was being 4
implemented within that region? 5
MR CONWAY: Possible – possible connection. They were a 6
member of – a school that was a – you had to be a school 7
within the region to receive the money. 8
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 9
MR CONWAY: And you may, being a beneficiary, yes, in some 10
way. 11
MR WOODWARD: And you say that, generally speaking, at least 12
in your understanding the – there might be two or three 13
specific banker schools within a region to fulfil that 14
administrative function for the region? 15
MR CONWAY: That’s correct, yes. 16
MR WOODWARD: And as I understand it, your evidence is that 17
your school was not a banker school, at least in that 18
sense? 19
MR CONWAY: Not in that sense. 20
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 21
MR CONWAY: In a sense, we were, I suppose, in a technical 22
sense a banker school because we received a grant on an 23
annual basis but I don’t think it was every year. I 24
can’t remember exactly. But it was a grant for a 25
particular purpose, and a different purpose on each 26
occasion. 27
MR WOODWARD: I see. Can we just turn to those grants. 28
You’ve been at the school, that is Kings Park, since 29
1998. 30
MR CONWAY: Yes. 1
MR WOODWARD: What’s your recollection as to when the grants 2
that you’re now referring to, which you – as I understand 3
it, you say are outside what would be the normal banker 4
school arrangement, when did they start? 5
MR CONWAY: I think they could have started in 2003. I’m not 6
– I couldn’t – may – they may have been earlier, I 7
couldn’t – I can’t remember really. 2003, I think was 8
connected with the school – introduction of a school 9
purchase card or corporate card. 10
MR WOODWARD: And did the grants normally occur, using that 11
term broadly, in the same way, in the sense that they – 12
they were initiated in the same way over the years? 13
MR CONWAY: Yes, yes. 14
MR WOODWARD: And how was that? 15
MR CONWAY: Well, from what I recall, Nino would approach me 16
and say, would I be prepared to accept money for a 17
project, eg, pilot project for the purchasing of credit 18
card. 19
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 20
MR CONWAY: And he would indicate he would be depositing a sum 21
of X amount of money. 22
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 23
MR CONWAY: And that he would send invoices to do with that 24
program, and if we could process them on – on the – for 25
the Department. 26
MR WOODWARD: Right. And so, based on what you’ve just said, 27
the initiating process always involved Mr Napoli, in your 28
experience, for the King – for the money that came into 29
Kings Park? 30
MR CONWAY: Yes. 1
MR WOODWARD: And in every case he would contact you to tell 2
you to – in other words, the contact would come from him 3
to you, not the other way around? 4
MR CONWAY: Yes, from him. Yes. 5
MR WOODWARD: Yes, yes. 6
MR CONWAY: It was mainly an oral contact at a meeting. Like, 7
he would catch you at a – say, a panel meeting or 8
something like that, and mention it. 9
MR WOODWARD: And in the cases that you can recall, as I 10
understand your evidence, it was – he would generally 11
identify a particular project that was – that the money 12
was connected to. 13
MR CONWAY: Yes. 14
MR WOODWARD: Yes. And, in your recollection, was that – and 15
I think you said it was generally a different project 16
each time. 17
MR CONWAY: Yes. 18
MR WOODWARD: Yes. Can you recall some – some examples of the 19
sorts of projects he identified as being recipients of 20
this funding? 21
MR CONWAY: Yes, I think there was things like technical 22
leadership and mentoring, CASES management, work – 23
workforce bridging and school council financial 24
requirements. Sometimes it was technical leadership and 25
it was a particular thing under technical leadership. It 26
could have been training for bursars, or business 27
managers as they became known. That sort of thing. 28
MR WOODWARD: And what was your understanding, at the time at 29
least, as to why the money was to be allocated to your 30
school for the purposes of those programs? 1
MR CONWAY: Well, it – I just thought – initially I thought it 2
would be – it was explained to me that it was – because 3
it was a project and a lot of it was to do with – with 4
other schools, that it was expedient to put it on an 5
annual basis into – into a – into the school. 6
MR WOODWARD: You say – sorry to interrupt. You say it was 7
explained to you. By Mr Napoli? 8
MR CONWAY: Yes. 9
MR WOODWARD: Yes. Go on. 10
MR CONWAY: I – I would have – I think I recall saying to him, 11
why would we, and he said it was expedient to put it in 12
to a school. And also on one occasion I remember him 13
saying that the Minister required a project to be 14
completed, and he needed to employ – this was in relation 15
to the employment of staff. Sorry, I’m jumping. 16
MR WOODWARD: That’s okay. Yes. 17
MR CONWAY: But in the – I asked, why were you employing staff 18
in – temporary staff outside the Department, he said 19
there was a ceiling of – his department had a ceiling, 20
every department had a ceiling. And it was a long 21
process, or something, to go around to get that. So he 22
was going to – he was employing outside to be able to 23
complete work that needed to be completed according to a 24
timeframe. 25
MR WOODWARD: So something needed to be done quickly, and the 26
existing rules within the central office created some 27
impediment to that process. Is that - - - 28
MR CONWAY: Yes. On one occasion, I can’t remember which 29
occasion, I did ask and that was – that was the response 30
I got. 1
MR WOODWARD: Yes. Based on - - - 2
MR CONWAY: So I presumed it would – he was – I presumed on 3
some occasion he was redirecting some Department money 4
for these projects and he would be accountable for that 5
Department money. 6
MR WOODWARD: Based on the explanation he gave you on that one 7
occasion though, Mr Conway, you would agree that the 8
explanation, itself, suggests that there was a – the 9
process was being set up to avoid some bureaucratic 10
impediment to achieving an outcome that Mr Napoli wanted 11
to achieve. 12
MR CONWAY: Yes. I suppose if you want to go quick – quick 13
process, or quicker process you’re bypassing some of the 14 processes. 15 MR WOODWARD: Yes. 16 MR CONWAY: Yes. 17
MR WOODWARD: So you used the term then, bypassing some of the 18
processes, did that cause you any disquiet at the time 19
that you were, effectively, being used, as it were, to 20
assist Mr Napoli bypass processes within the Department? 21
MR CONWAY: No, because I thought it was an authentic purpose 22
on the basis of the information that had been given to 23
me. I thought the project was authentic and it sounded a 24
reasonable explanation at the time. 25
MR WOODWARD: So - - - 26
MR CONWAY: In hindsight maybe not so reasonable. 27
MR WOODWARD: So at the time your focus was on being satisfied 28
that the process sounded authentic and that is the – 29
sorry, the project sounded authentic - - - 30
MR CONWAY: But - - - 1
MR WOODWARD: - - - of where the money was going to end up, so 2
you were less concerned about whether every I was crossed 3
and T was dotted in respect of that process? 4
MR CONWAY: Well, I figured that Mr Napoli was responsible and 5
accountable centrally in the Department. 6
MR WOODWARD: Yes. 7
MR CONWAY: And that it was a project initiated he – by him, 8
he was responsible for the project. I didn’t see myself 9
as being responsible in any way for the project, just a 10
conduit if you like, a - - - 11
MR WOODWARD: I see. But you did understand that at least for 12
that one occasion that part of the reason or part of the 13
rationale for putting the money in the Kings Park Primary 14
School was to at least avoid some processes that would 15
otherwise have impeded the project? 16
MR CONWAY: Yes, correct, yes. 17
MR WOODWARD: What sort of amounts of money were in your 18
collection involved in these various grants over the 19
years? 20
MR CONWAY: I think they ranged between 10 and I think the 21
largest one might have been 50, but I – I couldn’t recall 22
at the investigation, but I think I have since been 23
informed it was around 50. 24
MR WOODWARD: Contrasting your description of the banker 25
school system as you understood it and what was occurring 26
here, do we take it that you assumed when the arrangement 27
was set up with Mr Napoli that none of the money that was 28
to be expended would see it’s way in the form of any 29
goods or services to the – your school? 30
MR CONWAY: Yes, the – the – there weren’t any goods or