.svg)
The chairman of The Star Entertainment Group has told the inquiry into its licence suitability in New South Wales (NSW) state that internal messages undermining the regulator and its special manager for Star’s Sydney property were merely “heat of the moment comments”.
Star Entertainment chairman David Foster largely stood his ground in testimony to the second Bell inquiry into the company on Tuesday (April 23), attributing comments on abolishing the NSW casino regulator, suing and removing its special manager for the casino, and “prepping for war” were made “in the heat of the moment” over several weeks.
The inquiry’s findings, due mid-year, are likely to determine whether Star Entertainment will recover its casino licence or be forced out of the casino business in NSW.
Referred to company documents citing him and witness testimony from the first day of the inquiry, Foster admitted that “my words were poorly chosen”, but he opposed the suggestion of counsel assisting the inquiry that he planned to undermine the regulator.
“I was a bit trigger-happy with a number of my texts, but as is the case those immediate emotions were away, and we just get on with business as per normal,” Foster said.
“And I do stress that all of my engagements with the regulators and Mr Weeks has [sic] always been professional, and constructive, and focused on the same goal.”
Foster told the inquiry that his message to then-CEO Robbie Cooke in April 2023 that the NSW Independent Casino Commission (NICC) should be abolished was misconstrued as an attack on the regulator.
Instead, he said, the regulator should be reformed to include oversight of slot machine operations in the state’s pubs and clubs.
The inquiry then showed Foster his internal messages from January and February 2024 that referred to a possible “catalyst” to remove special manager Nicholas Weeks, including the possibility of exploiting exemptions to his indemnity clause.
The messages suggested an exemption could allow a shareholder class action against Weeks, who had been critical of Star Entertainment’s remediation progress.
But under questioning from counsel assisting Caspar Conde, Foster denied that the shareholder class action was his idea.
Instead, Foster said, there had been “a lot of concern” from the “broader community” of shareholders, but he could not recall the identity of anyone who had referred to shareholder litigation.
Agreeing with Conde that a shareholder class action against the regulator was a “bizarre idea”, Foster said he “didn’t anticipate that it was a viable option”.
Conde, however, suggested to Foster that no shareholder had made the suggestion to him, which Foster disputed.
Foster also denied the allegation raised on the first day of the inquiry that he and/or Cooke had been covertly monitoring the special manager’s communications.
Foster told the inquiry that a meeting between Weeks, the NICC and external lawyers at The Star’s boardroom had been flagged by “automatic alerts” for room bookings.
He said his subsequent collection of online information on the lawyers involved in the meeting had been performed under “high stress”.
“We wanted to understand what that meeting may have been about,” he said.
The inquiry continues on Wednesday with likely testimony from Cooke, who resigned as CEO in March, citing the NICC’s lack of confidence in him.
Also on Tuesday, the NICC announced in a suitability assessment decision that Star rival Crown Sydney, a subsidiary of Crown Resorts, was found suitable to retain its casino licence after a three-year remediation process.
“The NICC is confident the Crown we deemed suitable today has a strong model to keep operating into the future,” NICC chair Philip Crawford said in a statement.
“Hard work and transformation aside, the NICC has not forgotten the level of misconduct exposed in 2021 when Crown was found unsuitable,” he said.
“Crown Sydney has ongoing work to reach a steady state and it must continue to lift standards and maintain its cultural transformation.”
The assessment added: “The NICC is acutely aware of the possibility that Crown Sydney may choose to relax its standards following a period of very intense regulatory scrutiny and wishes to make it very clear that this will not be tolerated.”
The suitability decision follows the decision of the regulator in Victoria state in March to restore Crown Melbourne's casino licence.
