Who sent the Liberal Party a bouquet of flowers?

Clockwise from below left: Nationals leader David Littleproud, Opposition Leader Sussan Ley and the mystery bunch of flowers.

What a joy to see the love re-blossoming between the Liberals and Nationals after that sudden rush of blood to the head a week ago. No sooner had they jumped out of bed with each other, they were back in the room playing kissy-face again. A fresh Coalition agreement is expected to be inked any day now.

In the meantime, a big bouquet of flowers arrived at the doors of Liberal HQ in Canberra on Friday with a comically mawkish note attached. It was signed by “The Nationals” and dripping in the kind of treacly sentiment we’d expect of Barnaby Joyce on a bended-knee.

“Dear Liberals,” it began. “It’s us … The Nats … Your Nats. We know you probably weren’t expecting this letter. Or maybe you were. We’re not sure. But you always said we were predictable. Ha ha.”

The note that arrived with a bouquet of flowers delivered to Liberal HQ in Canberra on Friday, purportedly from The Nationals.

Yes, it does sound suspiciously like something Bridget McKenzie might write, but we don’t actually think this was written by a Nat and nor do the Liberals who received the posies – just a troll with an impeccably ghoulish sense of humour. The Libs who found the flowers got a good laugh out of the stunt, we hear.

The note continues:

“Look, we’ve had some time apart. And at first, we’ll admit … it felt good. You did your press conferences and said some stuff, we did our tractor and Akubra thing, and I feel that we both pretended to be fine. But I know deep down, something’s been missing. You. You complete us. Literally.

“Remember the good times? Those late nights in Canberra where we’d argue about climate policy like a couple fighting over the aircon temp? We miss that. We miss you. I miss you … Yours sitting on apology mountain, The Nationals.”

Ridiculous, buffoonish, obviously stupid … but we are talking about a party led by David Littleproud.

The trouble with Katie

During her time working with former NSW planning minister Rob Stokes, rumours abounded that his chief of staff, Katie Stevenson, was a source of much toxicity oozing from the office. News articles documented the high levels of staff turnover and repeatedly alluded to an unnamed individual as the cause of all this noxious energy.

Eventually raised with Stokes in parliament, he brushed off any suggestion of a fouled-up atmosphere among his people, calling the allegations “innuendo and smear” at a budget estimates hearing in 2021 and saying with an air of finality: “I will not tolerate bullying in my office.”

NSW Property Council executive director Katie Stevenson. Picture: Jeremy Piper

Stevenson went on to be named executive director at the Property Council of Australia, a plum role to which she was appointed in 2023 after Stokes had retired from politics. She remains in this position today.

Inconveniently, her name has come up several times in public hearings being run by the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption. It’s in the middle of probing a rogue former entity that once sat within Stokes’ portfolio of responsibilities, although there’s no suggestion that either he or Stevenson are in any way associated with the allegations being examined.

Two weeks ago the inquiry heard from Tony McCabe, a former bureaucrat who happened to remark rather scurvily on Stevenson, saying she would often call up “demanding that certain things would happen”. “And sometimes it would be providing extensive information in incredibly short periods of time,” McCabe said. “And it, it was quite an abusive relationship, where the chief of staff would ring myself and other members of the asset management team.”

McCabe’s evidence was followed by that of Bhupinder Barr, a bureaucrat who said his dealings with Stevenson started off “okay” and declined to a point that “wasn’t great”, citing an incident where, much like McCabe, he was asked to produce information on a tight time frame and, on the advice of his boss, began ignoring Stevenson’s phone calls because she kept “calling and calling and calling” seeking answers.

Hardly a capital offence to bang the table and badger people for answers (we do it everyday) but not exactly a flattering portrayal of life under the regime of Stokes’ chief of staff. We asked Stevenson for her side of the story but didn’t hear back by our deadline.

And as for that unnamed individual who supposedly immiserated the staff working in Stokes’ office all those years ago? Well, that mystery still endures.