Over 10 very juicy days, the NSW ICAC conducted its public inquiry into the conduct of former NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian. It’s been huge news, with Australia almost treating this as a test run of how we’d like to see Federal politicians similarly investigated for corruption and breach of public trust… but that’s another discussion. Now that the inquiry is moving into its next (private) phase, you’ve got time to catch up on what happened. Here’s a summary what happened in the Gladys Berejiklian ICAC hearings.
UPDATE 29 June 2023: ICAC has found that both Gladys Berejiklian and Darryl Maguire “engaged in serious corrupt conduct by breaching public trust in 2016 and 2017.” It found Berejiklian should have declared her personal relationship with Maguire, and that she should have notified ICAC of her suspicions about his conduct. ICAC has not recommended a criminal investigation be brought against Berejiklian; it has recommended that the Director of Public Prosecution consider criminal charges against Maguire.
Recap: What’s this ICAC investigation about?
- Disgraced former Liberal MP Daryl Maguire was separately investigated by ICAC to see whether he tried to profit from being an MP. He is alleged to have secured funding for projects where he would personally receive kickbacks from the contractors involved.
- Through these investigations, they found out that Berejiklian and Maguire had an on-off relationship – this was not previously known.
- In October 2021, ICAC announced they would looking at Berejiklian specifically to determine whether:
A) She knew about Maguire’s suss conduct while Premier, but didn’t report it
B) She deliberately funded projects in his seat (i.e: the Wagga hospital) to benefit him personally
There are three key questions that ICAC was addressing in these public hearings:
- Did Berejiklian do the wrong thing by keeping their relationship a secret?
- Did Berejiklian breach the public’s trust by not exposing suspected corruption?
- Did Berejiklian abuse her power by knowingly funding projects that Maguire would get financial kickbacks from?
Summary of the revelations from Gladys Berejiklian ICAC hearings
1. Should She Had Disclosed This Relationship?
Throughout questioning, Berejiklian insisted her relationship with Maguire wasn’t that serious, so therefore she didn’t need to disclose it. But former NSW Premier Mike Baird (the pair’s boss at the start of their relationship in 2012) said it absolutely should have been disclosed to manage potential conflict of interest.
Testimonies by Maguire along with taped phone calls and text messages contributed a lot of (pretty embarrassing) evidence that relationship was more serious than Gladys claims. She called him her “family” and “hawkiss”, which means beloved in Armenian. Maguire said they had discussed marriage and children at times.
Interestingly, Berejiklian did disclose other personal relationships during her career – her two cousins who also work in government, and an unnamed person who appointed her to a board. She claimed she declared these because they could have the perception of ‘personal benefit’, but because her relationship with Maguire would not personally benefit her, she didn’t need to disclose it.
2. Did She Know About Maguire’s Alleged Corruption?
It’s difficult to know if Berejiklian for sure knew that Maguire was possibly getting kickbacks from projects, because she stuck to an I-can’t-recall line of defense.
In one taped phone conversation in 2017, Maguire told her that he could make $1.5mill for securing a land deal at Badgerys Creek, NSW. When asked about it, Berejiklian said she wasn’t paying attention because Maguire was always “talking big”. She said that while sometimes she didn’t really care about or listen to what Maguire spoke about, but never suspected he was corrupt.
In another call, before Maguire was to front his first ICAC inquiry in 2018, Berejiklian asked him if he was nervous – he told her he felt “calm as a cucumber.” Despite Maguire mentioning phone taps and asking her to switch to encrypted messaging apps Berejiklian said she never “assumed any wrongdoing”. She said discovering in 2018 (via his ICAC hearings) what Maguire had been involved in was a “shock to the system” that made her re-evaluate everything.
3. Did She Abuse Her Power to Benefit Him?
Phone recordings suggest Berejiklian likely used her power as Premier to fund projects to benefit Maguire. This is a separate question to whether she knew about his corruption. She admitted Maguire influenced her decision to fund the Australian Clay Target Association in Wagga Wagga and she was also recorded telling him that she would “throw money at Wagga”. But Maguire says this was all part of ensuring the Liberal Party retained the seat at the next election.
For her part, Berejiklian says this was simply Maguire lobbying for projects in his electorate the same as any MP does. Other witnesses said Maguire was known for being very determined and persistent. On the topic of funding for the Wagga hospital, Berejiklian says she can’t remember if she asked then-Treasurer Dominic Perrottet to change the budget, but that she wouldn’t have been able to just “add projects in like that [for Maguire]… it would have to be in the pipeline with work already being done.”
What happens next… and when?
This is the annoying part. Now that the hearings are over, the next phase of the ICAC Inquiry happens privately. Lawyers will file written submissions and the commission factors them in. There is no official timeline for the final report to be delivered. ICAC’s ‘goal’ is to finalise everything 90 days after all submissions are received, but this can be dragged out by the legal teams.
Based on the final ICAC findings (whenever they land) the Director of Public Prosecutions could lay criminal charges against Berejiklian. But this would only happen if they believe she participated in or knowingly allowed corruption. We think this would be unlikely – but not impossible.
As Berejiklian has already resigned, the only other thing ICAC will do is either clear or condemn her reputation. Even then, a politician’s reputation is really decided by the public… so really, it just comes down to you think.
