‘Factually incorrect’: Premier refutes details of claim Maguire had key to her house
The NSW government will refer One National MP Mark Latham and Opposition Leader Jodi McKay to parliament’s privileges committee over their claims disgraced former MP Daryl Maguire had a key to Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s house.
NSW
Don't miss out on the headlines from NSW. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Premier defends 11 trips to ex Daryl Maguire’s electorate
- Barilaro: ‘I worry about Gladys’s mental health’
The NSW government will refer One National MP Mark Latham and Opposition Leader Jodi McKay to parliament’s privileges committee and demand they publicly state the “source” of their claims disgraced former MP Daryl Maguire had a key to Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s house.
Earlier today, Gladys Berejiklian insisted questions from the Labor leader which alleged Mr Maguire had a key to the Premier’s house included “things that are factually incorrect”.
Ms McKay had asked three questions about Ms Berejiklian’s relationship with the former MP, referencing “revelations” that “Daryl Maguire had a key and access to” the Premier’s home.
Transport Minister Andrew Constance this afternoon refer Mr Latham, who was the first to make the claim in parliament today, and Ms McKay to parliament’s privileges committee.
“It’s incumbent on Mr Latham and Ms McKay to clearly outline their sources,” Transport Minister Andrew Constance said.
He would not say why this was necessary beyond saying the question to the Premier was a “smear”.
“It was a deliberate smear, it was politics at a new low,” Mr Constance said. “It was a team effort by One Nation and Labor to smear the Premier.”
Asked what part of the question, does Mr Maguire have a key to the Premier’s house, was a smear, Mr Constance replied: “we’ll where did the information come from?”
Jodi McKay had asked the Premier: “Given revelations today that Daryl Maguire had a key and access to your home for several years, including as recently as last month, why did you breach your own ministerial Code of Conduct by failing to disclose this relationship?”
In response, Ms Berejiklian said that following her evidence to ICAC, false allegations have been made.
“I’ve read and heard things said including today, which are just factually incorrect,” she said.
“I respect the process, I have faith in the process, I’d ask everybody to have faith in that process of which I was a witness.”
“Your claims that the relationship didn’t have “sufficient status” have fallen apart,” Ms McKay said in one of her three questions on the issue.
“You either trust the ICAC or you don’t,” Ms Berejiklian told parliament, cautioning Ms McKay that she could be found in contempt of the corruption watchdog.
In response to one of Ms McKay’s three questions on the issue, Ms Berejiklian said:
“the Leader of the Opposition has chosen to repeat things that are factually incorrect”.
Leader of the House Mark Speakman attempted to object to each question but was overruled by the Premier who insisted on answering them.
Speaker Jonathan O’Dea cautioned Ms McKay, saying that it is normal parliamentary practice to respect “the sub judice rule” and “suppression orders that ICAC has made”.
He said there would be a “potential issue” with the question if Ms Berejiklian had not declared she was happy to take the question.
Health Minister Brad Hazzard also erupted at Ms McKay over the questions, calling her a “grub”.
“(This is) the first time in 30 years I’ve seen anybody, any grub, actually run against the order of ICAC,” he said.
On October 12, Ms Berejiklian said she was in a “a close personal relationship” with Mr Maguire.
She said it “did not have sufficient status for me to be able to call him any of those things,” when asked if he was her boyfriend or if she was in love with Mr Maguire.
On 2GB on Monday, Ms Berejiklian described the relationship as “close and personal”.”
“We were friends for a long time, we were close for a long time. Then obviously, after a certain point, it became more than just what friends do,” she said.
Ms McKay asked her questions after Mr Latham told NSW Parliament earlier today that Mr Maguire had a key to the Ms Berejiklian’s north shore home for many years and visited as recently as last month.
The maverick MP questioned whether the arrangement indicated a “intimate personal relationship” which triggered the Premier’s obligation under the ministerial Code of Conduct to declare all of Mr Maguire’s business interests
While asking a question of Don Harwin — who represents the Premier in the Upper House — Mr Latham claimed: “Daryl Maguire had a key to the Premier’s north shore home for many years, and while cohabitating, came and went as he liked as recently as last month”.
“Doesn’t this demonstrate an intimate personal relationship, and the Premier’s failure under the ministerial Code of Conduct to declare all of Daryl Maguire’s business interests?” he asked.
Mr Harwin, representing the Premier, said he would “take the question on notice,” giving the government 21 days to provide a written response.
Ms Berejiklian has repeatedly downplayed the relationship in public statements, insisting it was a close personal relationship and not an intimate one.
The distinction between “close personal relationship” and “intimate personal relationship” is important when considering the code of conduct governing all ministers.
Former DPP Nicholas Cowdery this week told The Daily Telegraph: “If the relationship was considered as an ‘intimate personal relationship’ there are obligations of disclosure on the Premier that may not have been satisfied.”
MORE NEWS
FBI’s shock election news after Guiliani’s embarrassing video
Transport mask use woefully low, seven NSW COVID cases
Cop guilty of assaulting Indigenous teen still on beat
Originally published as ‘Factually incorrect’: Premier refutes details of claim Maguire had key to her house