In the beginning of her testimony to the New South Wales corruption inquiry this morning, Gladys Berejiklian appeared defiant, unrepentant and even a little testy. The former NSW premier was not conceding an inch.
But as the phone taps were played — from phone calls with former lover and disgraced former MP for Wagga Wagga Daryl Maguire — she shrank in her chair and sounded a little less confident.
The taps are extremely damaging. In response to belligerent, hectoring demands for electorate money from Maguire, she says: “I’ll deal with it. I’ll fix it, I’ll fix it.”
Later she says: “I just fixed it.”
In another phone conversation, she tells Maguire, 62, that:
I’ve already got you the Wagga hospital.
I just spoke to [treasurer] Dom [Perottet] and I said: ‘Just put the $140m in the budget.’ He goes: ‘No worries.’
He just does what I tell him to do.
We’re giving Wagga more money than ever before.
I have just got you the $170 million in five minutes … You can’t have me fixing all the problems all the time.
The first 10 minutes of her testimony included a couple of rehearsed monologues about her unwavering commitment to public life — until she was interrupted by assistant commissioner Ruth McColl who reminded her to answer the questions and not deliver political speeches.
Asked by counsel assisting Scott Robertson if she had regarded Maguire as “family”, she repeatedly denied it.
After Robertson showed her an April 2018 text message in which she told him “You are my family,” she said that although she had “very strong feelings for him” she “would not have regarded him as a relative”.
She regarded Maguire as part of her family “in terms of my feelings but definitely not in any legal sense”.
Berejiklian seems to be treading a very fine line in her evidence between admitting to being in a the relationship — the Independent Commission Against Corruption has heard they were in love and had talked about having a child — she is adamant in maintaining it was not of “sufficient significance” to have publicly reported it.
This distinction is important because the ICAC Act states that all ministers must disclose potential conflict matters that involve a “family member”. Under the NSW ministerial code of conduct the definition of a family member includes “any person with whom the minister is in an intimate personal relationship”.
Any suspected breach of the NSW ministerial code of conduct can be investigated by the ICAC and, if substantiated, give rise to a finding of corrupt conduct.
Maguire said their five-year relationship, during which time Berejiklian was treasurer and premier, took place between 2015 and last year, including after he resigned from Parliament. Berejiklian said it ended in 2018.
Berejiklian also had a responsibility under section 11 of the ICAC Act to report any suspected corrupt conduct, but his business activities did not ring any alarm bells.
Yesterday ICAC heard phone taps in which she said: “I’ll throw money at Wagga, don’t you worry about that.”
“Just throw money at Wagga,” Maguire said.
“I’ll throw money at Wagga, don’t you worry about that,” she replied.
The hearing continues.
“…her testimony included a couple of rehearsed monologues about her unwavering commitment to public life — until she was interrupted by assistant commissioner Ruth McColl who reminded her to answer the questions and not deliver political speeches.”
A good illustration of one reason we must have integrity commissions, at state and federal levels. Nowhere else can a politician be required to just answer the question. Nowhere else do they ever answer a question unless it suits them.
Yep, and the MSM behavior when questioning Politicians is abysmal, they just roll over.
Watching Ms B in the corner square on the TV screen, I fantasised about any number of federal crooks being grilled. You can see why they will fight to the death against a federal integrity body.
It is truely galling to have the current Federal ‘government’ suggest that voters will need to provide ID before voting in order to protect the integrity of the voting process. Is the Electoral Commission under fire here? Or is it a brazen attempt to distract from the NSW ICAC revelations?
That too, but mainly it is the beginning of a campaign that we saw in Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election result by accusations there was fraudulent “leftie” voting. Will it mean therefore that any vote not cast in favour of the LNP will be subjected to extra, deep, long lasting and intense scrutiny and challenge by any non-Labor party?
I’ll repeat what I said under another article; the ‘government’ does three things only in governing the nation:
Wedge, distract and dog-whistle.
The voter ID legislation does all three.
Again, if you can’t see anything wrong with pork-barreling because everyone’s doing it – where are your boundaries to then come out and declare you’ve “acted with the greatest of integrity at all times”?
As for those recorded calls, again the chronology :-
a) Maguire’s call to that “mate” – about said “mate” looking after the dollars and cents – that they can share?
Then –
b) Phone calls between Darryl and Gladys in 2018 – intercepted by ICAC – that she tells him he’d better “look after his end” – that (his) failure to do so would “kill” her?
c) October 2020 ICAC reveals that they had been eavesdropping on Maguire and hauled Shredder up too.
d) 6 or so weeks later (Dec 7) Shredder tells us that “pork-barreling’s all right because everybody’s doing it”? …… Nothing to do with the possibility of ‘what else ICAC might have’ up their sleeve; that she was just pre-mitigating her own case circumstances?
There was a quote from a Battle of Britain fighter pilot that I remember, who said in response to a remark about stress in a dogfight. The reply went that if you want to know what stress is like then have a ME109 on your tail. May this ICAC keep it’s cannon firmly locked on hers.
Keith Miller, aussie all-rounder and spitfire pilot 🙂
Yes, Keith Miller, but he was a Mosquito pilot.
cheers Wayne!
And the quote: “pressure is having a Messersmitt up your arse”.