Liberal figure denies 'ridiculous' evidence on $660k payments to premier's sister-in-law

Jeremy Greenwood walked into the Independent Commission Against Corruption hearing on Wednesday facing a straightforward challenge: the evidence he had given about Anita Perrottet's work did not hold up. Counsel assisting the inquiry, Peggy Dwyer SC, had documents in hand that suggested the advice Greenwood claimed Perrottet had originated—on vaping regulation, on greyhound industry terminology—had actually appeared in public reports years before she was ever engaged.

The core allegation is substantial. Between 2020 and 2023, Greenwood, Charles Perrottet (Anita's husband), and Christian Ellis allegedly shared $2 million in payments from fugitive developer Jean Nassif or his company Toplace. The question before ICAC is whether those payments were disguised political donations. Nassif himself appeared via video from Beirut on Monday and Tuesday, declaring he was "not corrupt." Now Greenwood was back, defending his account of what Anita Perrottet actually did to earn her share.

Greenwood had previously testified that Anita Perrottet provided a "mum's perspective" to lobbying firms controlled by him and Ellis. He said she may have coined the term "zero unnecessary euthanasia" for greyhounds and offered advice on discouraging minors from vaping—including removing flavored products like bubble gum—as well as guidance on black market regulation. The invoices to her company, Macquarie Consulting, totaled $660,999 over two and a half years. Anita Perrottet herself told the watchdog the payments were for "strategic and marketing advice." Her husband Charles said they were "holistic" payments covering both his advice to Nassif on developments and her work.

Dwyer presented a 2017 report from the NSW greyhound industry reform panel that already contained the phrase "zero unnecessary euthanasia." She showed Greenwood a Philip Morris submission to a 2020 senate inquiry discussing measures to regulate illicit tobacco trade, and a 2019 report on applying guidelines to prevent youth access to vapes. Both documents predated Perrottet's involvement. When Dwyer suggested Greenwood had "outsmarted himself by coming up with that false evidence," he simply disagreed. When she asked how old Anita Perrottet's children were when she provided advice on vaping to minors, Greenwood said he did not know and did not think it was relevant. The presiding commissioner, Fabian Gleeson, had to intervene and tell him to answer the question rather than debate. Greenwood then said he presumed they were under ten. Dwyer corrected him: they were around two and three at the time. She asked if Perrottet had given him a "mum's perspective on deterring under-fives from vaping." Greenwood said no.

Dwyer then delivered her assessment directly: "Your evidence is ridiculous, can I suggest to you, that Anita Perrottet contributed to a debate that had been the subject of professional reports … for many years before you say you brought Anita Perrottet on board." Greenwood disagreed again. The exchange revealed a pattern: Greenwood had acknowledged that payments to Macquarie Consulting were also meant to remunerate Charles Perrottet for advice he gave to Nassif. Yet when Dwyer pressed him on whether he had ever been in a financial arrangement with Charles Perrottet for consulting work, he said no—only previous arrangements "on a racehorse" and "an old Redfield rugby fantasy football league." Dwyer called that response ridiculous given his own earlier acknowledgment that money going to Macquarie Consulting was "in effect to thank Charles or compensate him for the advice he had given to Jean Nassif." Greenwood disagreed.

Christian Ellis moved to the UK at the start of the year and is not expected to appear before the commission. Dominic Perrottet, the former NSW premier and Anita's brother-in-law, is not named as a person of interest in ICAC's allegations and faces no accusations of wrongdoing. The inquiry continues, with the central question unresolved: whether the $2 million in payments from Nassif represented legitimate consulting fees or political donations funneled through family members and business associates.