It was an emotive plea,however the private life of Berejiklian is exactly why this corruption inquiry into the former premier exists.
Daryl Maguire and Gladys Berejiklian.ICAC/Nick Moir
Callan was seeking to stop “intimate details” of Berejiklian’s relationship with now disgraced MP Daryl Maguire from being revealed during public examination before the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
She insisted questions proposed to be asked of Maguire raised “personal privacy concerns of the highest order for my client” and could lead to intense media scrutiny,humiliation and harm.
No one would relish having the intimate private details of their relationship revealed in the most public of ways,least of all Berejiklian. But this is not salaciousness for the sake of it.
It is not about embarrassing or shaming Berejiklian and Maguire,nor is it about releasing titillating details because they exist. There is a public need for their relationship to be defined.
Maguire and Berejiklian did not have a platonic relationship,that much is clear (even if Callan curiously suggested that not sharing a diary or bank accounts casts doubt on its seriousness).
At the heart of the inquiry into Berejiklian is whether she breached the public’s trust by concealing a romantic relationship with Maguire and whether that relationship clouded her judgment or influenced her decision-making when it came to spending public money.
Assistant Commissioner Ruth McColl,SC,rejected Callan’s application to shield Berejiklian.
Maguire went on to tell the ICAC he had a key to Berejiklian’s house during the years they were together and they spoke about marriage. They loved each other and discussed having a child.
That version is vastly different to the one Berejiklian presented to the ICAC last year,when she insisted their relationship was not of sufficient status to tell anyone,even family or friends.
Yet,as counsel assisting Scott Robertson noted,outside the ICAC Berejiklian embarked on a media blitz,most notably telling a gossip columnist that she loved Maguire and hoped they would marry. (Robertson tendered 40 pages of evidence relating to her post-ICAC media interviews).
Indeed,there is a difference between giving an interview to a gossip columnist and being examined under oath. Berejiklian will have the chance to address that on Friday when she gives evidence.
Responding to Callan’s application for some of Maguire’s evidence to be held in private,Robertson made the point that such a move risked creating “a public inquiry in name only”.
Citing the ICAC Act,Robertson said:“In very simple but emphatic terms ... a public inquiry is to be held in public”.
Maguire’s version of events detailed on Thursday aligns with Berejiklian’s portrayal of the relationship on the front paper of a Sunday newspaper less than a week after her initial ICAC appearance,where she played down the status of their romance.
Both versions cannot be accurate,and the public deserves to know which one is,even if that is awkward at best,or mortifying at worst,for the woman who held the highest public office in NSW.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights.Sign up.