Did Cesar Melhem tell lies under oath to the Royal Commission?

Explosive evidence was given yesterday by an adviser to the Premier that Cesar Melhem tried to speak to him last month about the evidence the adviser intended to give to the Trade Unions Royal Commission.

 This flatly contradicts Mr Melhem’s denial on Tuesday that any such conversation took place.

 John-Paul Blandthorn, a former AWU organiser, told the Commission Mr Melhem also said Mr Blandthorn may be able to get help with his legal expenses from a fund “in the Attorney-General’s office or somewhere.”

 Giving perjured evidence to a Commonwealth Royal Commission carries a five year jail term, as does attempting to induce a witness to give false testimony. 

On Tuesday, Mr Melhem gave this account to the Commission about speaking to Mr Blandthorn recently:

 Q.  What was the purpose of the discussion?

 A.  Oh, basically I just – just work matters, nothing to do with this. Because Mr Blandthorn worked in the Premier’s Department, and I do visit that office from time to time for meetings and so forth, so – have I had discussions in relation to this? No. We were discussing other matters.

 Q.  Did you ask him about the evidence he might give in the Commission?

 A.  Absolutely not.

 Q.  This was a conversation you had with him in person, was it?

 A.  No, I think on the phone. I would have rang regarding some other matters, but not this one. I’ve not had any discussion with him in relation to his evidence whatsoever.

 (See pp.386-7 of the transcript at http://bit.ly/1G6WutA)

 However, yesterday Mr Blandthorn told the Commission he received a phone call from Mr Melhem on 22 May last year:

 Mr Melhem asked me – he wanted to speak about the upcoming Royal Commission on three matters. The call lasted less than a minute. I didn’t want to engage, so I sort of said to him, “Mate, I can’t really talk now. I’m in a meeting. I don’t want to be talking on the phone.” He then said, “Look, you know, if the AWU’s struggling to pay your legal bills, there’s a fund with the Attorney General’s office”, or something. I said, “I really can’t be talking about this. I’ve got to go back to my meeting.”

 When asked what three matters Mr Melhem had raised, Mr Blandthorn replied:

 He said, “Hey, I hear you are being called before the Royal Commission in relation to Cleanevent, jockeys and netballers.” He then started to talk about – he went on to talk about – at that stage, I said, “Sorry, I’m unable to speak about this. I’m in a meeting. I’ve got to get back”, and that’s what happened.

 (see pp.530 of the transcript at http://bit.ly/1GlkpHN)

 Mr Melhem’s lawyer declined an opportunity provided by the Commissioner to ask Mr Blandthorn questions about this evidence.

 For today’s media accounts of evidence given at yesterday’s hearings, see the Herald Sun at http://bit.ly/1KF3FsG, The Age at http://bit.ly/1IiAzlH, The Australian at http://bit.ly/1M5YSRr.