Why can’t you see it, Gladys Berejiklian? your position is untenable

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian. Picture: Steven Saphore

The revelations about NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s secret love affair with disgraced former MP Daryl Maguire have been personally humiliating and embarrassing but, more importantly, show she has been compromised and remaining in office is untenable. Berejiklian is not corrupt but she is guilty of a shocking lapse of judgment, ethics and integrity.

This is not so much about her personal life, even though it is inexorably linked with her political life, but about public duty. Berejiklian should not have maintained a relationship with Maguire or discussed his business dealings. She should have disclosed the relationship to parliament and excused herself from relevant cabinet discussions.

The so-called “bad boyfriend” or “unlucky in love” defence does not cut it. Berejiklian exercised poor judgment being in a relationship with the scandalous former Wagga Wagga Liberal MP who has — through the hearings of the Independent Commission Against Corruption — admitted wrongdoing. This relationship went on for perhaps five years, ­including after he left parliament in dishonour in 2018.

Just because Berejiklian has been overall a good Premier, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, we should not turn a blind eye to lapses in probity. I too respect Berejiklian and admire how she has handled the public health and economic emergency. But her overall performance as Premier is an absurd and illogical rationalisation for ignoring her integrity failures.

The most damning evidence at ICAC has been phone recordings of Maguire discussing his business dealings with Berejiklian and itemising the money he would make from some deals. Maguire told ICAC he sought “guidance” and “reassurance” from Berejik­lian. Moreover, Berejiklian met Maguire’s clients and business partners. None of this was reported to ICAC by Berejiklian. Nor did the Premier declare she had a potential conflict of interest to her cabinet colleagues when discussing the new airport being built at Badgerys Creek because of her lover’s business dealings and relationships. It is staggering that this, apparently, never occurred to her.

Berejiklian claims she was not in an “intimate” relationship but, rather, a “close personal relationship”. It is an odd way to describe a love affair that ran for five or more years and only ended recently. In a weekend interview, Berejiklian said she was in love with Maguire and hoped to marry him one day. Does anybody really accept that such a relationship was not “intimate” if marriage was being thought of?

This is critically important because under the Ministerial Code of Conduct — a regulation that sits under the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 — ministers must disclose the “pecuniary and other interests” of a “family member”, defined as “any other person with whom the minister is in an intimate personal relationship”.

If Berejiklian thought she might marry Maguire one day then that means she could stand to benefit financially from his business dealings, some of which she was evidently aware of. The Code of Conduct for Members, governing the activities of Members of the Legislative Assembly, might also be relevant here.

This scandal is far from over. There are likely to be more revelations. There is also the prospect of adverse findings against the Premier by ICAC. This scandal will be an albatross around the government’s neck. In any event, Berejiklian’s standing has been severely diminished and the government has been badly damaged. It casts into doubt Berejiklian’s ability to continue to lead the government given this role demands the trust and respect of voters. Consider the consequences if Berejiklian remains Premier. If any other Liberal or National minister, or backbencher, is caught failing to disclose relationships or conflicts of interest, or breaches the Ministerial Code of Conduct, Berejiklian’s ability to enforce discipline or resignation is weakened. How can she insist on the highest standards from her colleagues while exempting herself?

The only way the government can move on from this scandal is to select a new premier. This would give the government a clean break from the scandal, a fresh face in the premiership and signal a clear and unequivocal commitment to high personal and professional standards. There are several alternative Liberal leaders, including Matt Kean, Dominic Perrottet, Mark Speakman and Rob Stokes.

Labor cannot believe this turn of events. Any plan Berejiklian had of reminding voters at the next election of the corruption in the past Labor government, and the revolving-door premiership, is now undermined. The tawdry saga of Labor ministers and backbenchers enveloped in scandal after scandal will lose its political impact. The focus is now on the scandal-prone Coalition government. We could soon see the fourth Liberal premier in six-and-a-half years.

Labor leader Jodi McKay was Labor’s white knight when it came to reporting corruption. She was described as “corruption-resistant”. Berejiklian could not face a more formidable opponent on the issue of ethics in public life.

The Opposition Leader has been relentless, vigorous and unsparing in her criticism. Labor is relishing the opportunity to remind the Liberal Party of their own probity lapses.

It is unlikely Berejiklian can ­remain Premier. The sharks are, as ever in politics, circling. Rather than endure questions about this scandal day after day, with the possibility of further harmful revelations, it is better to go now. This would be understood and respected by voters. That Berejiklian cannot see this is extraordinary. Her credibility drains away every day she defiantly remains in power.

Berejiklian cannot and should not remain in office. We must insist that our politicians govern with the highest ethical standards and with unimpeachable professional integrity. This is about, above all, the discharge of public duties. Premiers must be above ­reproach. If Berejiklian survives, our democracy is weakened and our politics will be irreversibly ­degraded.