Gladys Berejiklian Icac hearing live updates: former premier offered to ‘fix it’ when Daryl Maguire complained of lack of funding

Berejiklian explains that, having lost the Orange by-election to the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, she may have wanted to fund something relating to shooting to help the Coalition win back regional voters in the area.

Her political desire to win back voters in the bush is the only context she can recall in relation to the grant.

Was her support for the grant influenced by the fact that Maguire was advancing it?

It could have been part of the consideration, but the absolute consideration for me… was the consequence of the Orange by-election. I don’t remember meeting with him.

Berejiklian is asked why she didn’t simply tell the proponents to do more work on the proposal to ensure it was a net benefit to the state.

Berejiklian:

From the evidence that I understand was provided last week, those discussions may very well have occurred in the meeting.

She goes on to say nothing would be built if the government only ever followed Treasury’s advice.

She said she may been persuaded that “we needed to appease the rural and regional communities” following the Orange by-election loss.

We would have gauged whether there was community support. I think the government was very sensitive, or frightened or scared… of parts of regional NSW turning away from the government.

Robertson asks why she supported the grant proposal.

She can’t recall but speculates that it was because it would “raise our stocks” in the regions after the government lost the Orange by-election.

The only thing I recall when I heard about this grant through this process was its proximity to the Orange by-election.

Berejiklian is showed a briefing note from one of her staff about the grant in November 2016. At the time, Maguire was a parliamentary secretary, so he couldn’t put forward a submission to the cabinet committee.

The briefing note suggests a meeting took place between Maguire and Berejiklian about it.

Berejiklian says she has no recollection of a meeting. She says it is possible a meeting took place.

Berejiklian does agree that she indicated her support for the submission.

She says that was not irregular.

Berejiklian can’t remember whether the submission was supported by Treasury.

She’s shown a document clearly showing that it wasn’t because a “net benefit for the state has not been demonstrated”.

I think all treasurers would note that this was generally Treasury’s default position.

We’re back.

First, Scott Robertson makes clear there is no evidence of wrongdoing concerning Brad Hazzard or Dominic Perrottet, who were mentioned earlier.

The questions now turn to the $5.5m grant to the Australian Clay Target Association, which Maguire was advocating for in 2016.

Berejiklian, the then treasurer, was chair of a powerful cabinet sub-committee that considered the grant.

She’s asked whether she directed that the grant should be placed onto the agenda of the committee. She says she can’t recall.

Berejiklian says a minister may have suggested it be added to the agenda months earlier, and she simply acted on that direction.

She also says she has no recollection of Maguire raising the grant with her prior to the committee’s consideration of it.

It’s a possibility, but it’s an equal possibility that a minister raised it.

We’ve just adjourned for a brief break.

Well, what an hour that was. Here’s what we learned:

• Gladys Berejiklian offered to “fix” a grievance her then secret lover had about not getting $170m for Wagga hospital in his electorate in the 2018 budget. In a secretly recorded conversation, Berejiklian offered to call Dominic Perrottet. She told Daryl Maguire that Perrottet “does what I ask him to”. Within two hours, the budget had changed to include the money. Maguire still complained that there wasn’t money for Tumut hospital and a school. Berejiklian said: “I can’t fix everything else.”
• Berejiklian denied repeatedly that she’d treated Maguire favourably. She said she treated him like any other MP.
• She also repeatedly denied that she suspected Maguire was engaged in corrupt conduct, despite him telling her of a $1.5m debt that he was going to resolve by his involvement in a land deal near the western Sydney airport.
• Berejiklian said she didn’t declare the relationship with Maguire because there was no personal benefit for her. She was quizzed on why she declared that her two cousins work in the public service, but not that Maguire, a sitting MP, was her lover. She said she didn’t feel confident in the relationship with Maguire or his commitment to it.
• Asked how she responded to her former colleagues who say she should have declared the Maguire relationship, Berejiklian said that “they weren’t in it. So they wouldn’t have known my state of mind”.

Another intercept is played. This has also been played previously.

In the recording, Gladys Berejiklian relays a message that former minister Niall Blair is going to take up matters on Daryl Maguire’s behalf about a potential business failure and regional jobs during a trade mission in China.

The business had nothing to do with Wagga Wagga, Maguire’s electorate.

In the call, Berejiklian says:

It’s none of my business, I’m just letting you know.

Maguire:

They’re petrified that I’m going to interfere. And I will. This is people’s life’s work, of course I’m going to interfere.

In a separate recording, Maguire talks of going to China. He says Blair doesn’t want him to go to China:

I said I’ll go where I please, but if you manage to get some movement and get a result … I don’t want to go, but I’m not going to let this company fold and go under. They don’t get it. It’s all about the minister.

Maguire says there’s been “some movement” on the issue. Berejiklian responds:

That’s good, do you still need to go if it get’s fixed?

Maguire:

No, that’s what I’m pushing for.

Scott Robertson asks Berejiklian whether she suspected Maguire was engaged in corrupt conduct? She says she did not.

Robertson asks her why she didn’t tell Maguire to butt out and not risk an important trade mission.

I didn’t think to do that.

Robertson is pressing the ex-premier here. He asks how it could not have crossed her mind that it was “strange, unusual or unexpected” that a sitting member of parliament was saying he would make $1.5m out of a property deal.

Berejiklian says she would not have given it a second thought:

It wouldn’t have crossed my mind that it would have materialised. I would have assumed it was pie-in-the-sky and I wouldn’t have given it any more thought.

The questioning shifts to Gladys Berejiklian’s knowledge of Daryl Maguire’s debts. Prior evidence suggested she was aware that Maguire had a debt of about $1.5m in September 2017.

Another series of wiretaps are played. These have been heard at a previous hearing.

In the first, Maguire says he is in $1.5m of debt and invites the premier to repeat that number. He then says the debt will be resolved soon.

In the second, he says he’s finally got the “Badgerys Creek stuff” resolved, which would help him pay off debt. That reference was to a land deal Maguire was seeking to make for the sale of land near the western Sydney airport.

He said he believed he could make a $1.5m commission from the sale. Berejiklian says something like: “I can believe it.”

Scott Robertson:

Did you suspect that Mr Maguire may have been or was engaged in corrupt conduct?

Berejiklian:

She goes on:

I did not pay too much attention to that because he was always talking big and I didn’t pay much attention to it … I never thought he was doing anything untoward.

Robertson asks her whether it didn’t strike her as strange that Maguire could make $1.5m in a secondary job while in parliament. She says she didn’t take Maguire seriously.

No, I don’t think I would have paid it any attention. I don’t think I even listened properly.

Gladys Berejiklian again insists she was able to separate her private life from her public duties.

All her decisions were made in the best interests of the public, she says.

For many of us, we deal with colleagues on a day-to-day basis, for some of them we have affection, for some of them we don’t. But at the end of the day, we need to make decisions in the best interests of the community.

Scott Robertson asks whether she was concerned there may have been a perception of influence over her decision making on projects Daryl Maguire was advocating for.

I always work within the law. I would always make sure that every decision that I took was in the best interests of the community, but also in the best interest of the government.

Your colleagues have said the relationship should have been disclosed, do you disagree with that?

Berejiklian:

They weren’t in it [the relationship]. So they wouldn’t have known my state of mind or the status of it.

Robertson asks again: why didn’t you declare your close personal relationship with Maguire?

We didn’t share finances. We didn’t live together. I was not confident in his level of commitment. I did not regard him as a member of my family.

Robertson asks whether she shared finances with her cousins? Berejiklian says she didn’t, but says they are her “blood” relatives.

Does she live with her cousins? No, Berejiklian says.

Robertson asks how she draws a line between the two relationships, one of which was disclosed, and the other was not.

Berejiklian says she was uncertain about the nature of the relationship with Maguire and didn’t feel comfortable with his level of commitment.

We’re now back on to Berejiklian’s failure to declare the relationship as a potential conflict of interest, in line with the ministerial code.

She said she had understood that such conflicts only needed to be declared if there was a personal benefit to her.

For example, building a hospital, is not a personal benefit for me.

Robertson asks her why, then, did she declare that two of her cousins worked in the public service.

She says she was concerned they might be treated favourably because of their relation to her.

Would she have taken these steps if it was anyone else, other than Maguire?

I don’t accept that. If a colleague contacted me and there was a project or something that they felt strongly about that had been omitted inadvertently, or they were pushing, I would often text the relevant minister if there was a problem.

Berejiklian is asked about the recordings. Do they show she had the budget papers changed within two hours after Maguire’s request for money for the Wagga hospital:

Not at all, I wouldn’t read that. That would have been impossible to do unless the project was already ready to go … you can’t just add line items in like that.

Further recording extracts are played. Daryl Maguire complains again of the lack of funding for the Wagga hospital.

Gladys Berejiklian says she fixed the Wagga hospital issue:

I can’t fix everything else.

Maguire presses Berejiklian on whether money would be given for Tumut hospital. She asks him not to start with that “rubbish” and says she’s given him $170m for the Wagga hospital.

He asks her to find at least $500,000 or $1m for the Tumut hospital.

Berejiklian tells him to text Brad Hazzard:

You can’t have me fixing all the problems all the time.

Another telephone intercept is played from two hours after the first phone call.

Gladys Berejiklian says:

I’ve already got you the Wagga hospital … I just spoke to Dom [Dominic Perrottet] and I said, ‘Just put the $140 in the budget.’ He goes, ‘No worries.’ He does what I ask him to.

Daryl Maguire:

It is supposed to be 170.

Berejiklian:

Whatever it is … he is putting it in whatever it is, OK?

Maguire says “we will fucking lose Wagga” and there would be nothing to use to defend the seat.

Berejiklian asks Maguire not to get worked up and says:

All you do is shout at me sometimes.

Maguire says the Tumut hospital is the key to winning the seat.

Icac plays a recording of a phone call on the afternoon the texts were sent (in May 2018, for those playing at home).

Daryl Maguire complains of his conversation with the Treasury about the lack of money for Wagga Wagga in the budget.

He recalls saying to the Treasury:

No money for Wagga, you’ll have a fucking riot on your hands.

Gladys Berejiklian says:

I’ll deal with it. I’ll fix it.