PwC stonewalls Senate over fight with partner who sued
Kevin Burrowes gives every appearance of a man morally injured. That’s entirely his prerogative. And hasn’t it worked brilliantly so far?
The involvement of Sydney solicitor Rebekah Giles in the drafting of questions sent to PwC has triggered the firm’s latest standoff with the Senate.
PwC is less than pleased at being made to answer questions lodged by senator Barbara Pocock in a document first created by Giles. That’s because the lawyer has been representing PwC partner Richard Gregg, who successfully sued the firm for wrongful dismissal in August after the firm wrongly implied his ouster was linked to the tax leaks scandal.
Two months later, some smart cookie at PwC checked the metadata on the questions submitted to it to find Giles had created the document. Turns out when the senator or her staff compiled their questions, they sloppily worked on top of Giles’ original suggestions, whatever they said.
This revelation of the solicitor’s involvement was altogether too much for the bruised and battered firm, which is now refusing to answer the questions. A spokesman said PwC had answered “dozens” of questions “in great detail” to the Senate and “will continue to be transparent”. The firm, however, had “politely declined” questions relating to “specific details” in an ongoing legal issue “authored by the lawyer of an individual who is in a legal dispute with PwC”.
This mirrors the strategy of Burrows who had in his pugnacious Senate appearance refused to confirm to Pocock if he’d read the press release proclaiming Gregg’s firing, saying the matter was “before the courts”, or could soon return there.
PwC also had its lawyers at Corrs Chambers Westgarth fire off a legal letter to Giles, asking her if Gregg had given her authorisation to send questions to Pocock, and whether she’d had anything to do with Pocock’s earlier associated line of Senate questioning. Giles, who didn’t get where she was by being a pushover, in turn fired back, accusing PwC of attempting to deter the Senate from its work before asking if PwC chief Kevin Burrowes had approved the sending of the legal letter sent to her.
Aside from the fire and fury, the episode illuminates the inescapable fact that senators invariably receive all sorts of help with their interrogations.
One could argue it rather undercuts parliament’s stated desire for accountability if it’s instead prosecuting the agendas of PwC partners who did the wrong thing (for all it emerged in court that PwC tried to sack Gregg not for his involvement in the tax leaks scandal at all but over earlier alleged breaches of professional standards). Then again, the Senate’s a chaotic place: veering off the stated agenda is hardly unusual.
Pocock, for what it’s worth, had her own reasons for asking about Gregg, last month accusing the firm of throwing “innocent people under the bus” while failing to “properly come clean about who did what within the firm”. No doubt Burrowes disagrees. But there’s little improper in Pocock calling on all the resources she can muster to prosecute that case. In a statement, the Greens senator said she spoke to a wide range of sources including “former and current partners of PwC and their legal representatives”. “Parliamentary Privilege exists to protect the work of the parliament even from those who like to throw their weight around,” she added.
In the 11 months since it was revealed that PwC had sacked a partner for breaking an ATO confidentiality agreement – triggering a war with the government over the firm’s ethics and conduct – it seems everyone is returning to form.
Pocock is doing the classic minor party thing, scouring (very) far and wide for vulnerabilities. Giles relentlessly advocates for her clients in every forum that’ll have her. And Burrowes gives every appearance of a man morally injured, stung and outraged by the indignities he and the prestigious global firm he represents continue to be subjected to by these ungrateful colonials who keep leaking his speeches and collaborating with his enemies.
As a strategy, that’s entirely his prerogative. And hasn’t it worked brilliantly so far?
The country’s most expert opinion and analysis. Sign up to our weekly Opinion newsletter.
Myriam Robin is Rear Window editor based in the Melbourne newsroom. A Rear Window columnist since 2017, she previously reported on financial markets and media. Connect with Myriam on Twitter. Email Myriam at myriam.robin@afr.com