Berejiklian inquiry day seven as it happened: Former NSW premier’s chief of staff Sarah Cruickshank tells ICAC she knew of ‘historical’ relationship with Daryl Maguire years ago

• Ms Cruickshank, who was Ms Berejiklian’s chief of staff from January 2017 to early last year, said the then-premier called her on July 13, 2018, after Mr Maguire had given evidence at a separate ICAC inquiry, and told her she had been in a “historical” relationship with Mr Maguire that ended before she became premier in January 2017. “I left the conversation with the impression it was more than just a few dinners,” Ms Cruickshank said. “I didn’t get the sense it was a full-blown intense relationship but I’m just reading that.”
• The call was more than two years before the relationship became public, and Ms Berejiklian told the ICAC in October last year that she had in fact been in a relationship with Mr Maguire between 2015 and at least July 2018, which included well over a year of her time as premier. She asked Mr Maguire in July 2018 to quit politics as a result of his evidence at the earlier ICAC inquiry.
• Ms Cruickshank is not accused of wrongdoing. She said that she did not believe in 2018 that disclosures needed to be made because Ms Berejiklian had told her the relationship had ended before she became premier. Asked today by ICAC Assistant Commissioner Ruth McColl, SC, if Ms Berejiklian had “lied” to her, Ms Cruickshank said: “That’s your word, Commissioner, but, yes, I, I did not know what ... the premier had said last year.” Pressed about whether there was “any other description of it than a lie”, Ms Cruickshank replied: “No, there probably isn’t. I’m just uncomfortable using the word. But I accept the word, yep.”

• Ms Cruickshank said that if she had known the relationship was ongoing she would have “sat down with [the premier] ... and gone through whether or not there were implications for things she had done”. She said she would have told Mr Maguire that Ms Berejiklian should not be involved in decision-making in relation to his proposals and she should be kept at arm’s length.
• But Ms Cruickshank also said this was about “optics” and she had not seen evidence of Ms Berejiklian favouring proposals from Mr Maguire. She said her former boss always played by the book and she “never saw anything other than somebody who stuck by the rules”. “She is very up front and very much full of integrity,” Ms Cruickshank said, which was part of the reason why she was “surprised” to be giving evidence at the ICAC.
• Ms Cruickshank was taken to an email in 2017 in which the head of the Department of Regional NSW was keeping her informed of a proposal for an upgrade of a gun club in Mr Maguire’s electorate. By this stage, the state government had signed off on a $5.5 million conditional grant for the club, the Australian Clay Target Association. The ICAC has heard this was a pet project of Mr Maguire’s and that it was the subject of an urgent funding proposal brought before cabinet’s expenditure review committee when Ms Berejiklian was treasurer in December 2016. But Ms Cruickshank said she couldn’t recall having any specific “or even passing” interest in the gun club in 2017 and “that remains the case today”.

Earlier today, two more former senior staffers to Ms Berejiklian gave evidence. They are not accused of wrongdoing. Their evidence was as follows:

• Neil Harley, who took over as chief of staff from Ms Cruickshank last year, told the ICAC he first became aware of the Berejiklian-Maguire relationship last year when Ms Berejiklian was summonsed to give evidence at the corruption watchdog’s Sydney headquarters. Mr Harley said “it was a very difficult conversation for both of us” and Ms Berejiklian was “inherently a very private person”.

• “We didn’t go into detail about when [the relationship] ... commenced and when it finished,” he said. “We talked in broad terms about the nature of the relationship.” He said he found out later that the relationship had “continued on for a lot longer than I had anticipated” and “it was more recent” than he had thought.

• Asked what he would have done differently if he had known about the relationship at the time, Mr Harley said he and others “might have provided advice to her about how that situation could appropriately be managed”.
• In an email on August 20, 2018, Mr Harley said Ms Berejiklian wanted to “push” a plan to award $20 million dollars in funding to the Riverina Conservatorium of Music in Wagga Wagga for a recital hall. He had described the project in an earlier email on August 1 as a “longstanding wish list item” for Mr Maguire. By this date, Mr Maguire had quit politics after his evidence at the earlier ICAC inquiry. This triggered a by-election in Wagga Wagga and, in discussions about announcements for that campaign, Mr Harley said in the August 20 email to colleagues that “I personally don’t want to push this project but the premier did”.

• The conservatorium had already received $10 million to relocate premises. Mr Harley said in the email that there was “no need to go further than we already have at this stage” by awarding an extra $20 million. He told the ICAC today that “my belief that a further commitment of further funds beyond the $10 million ... wouldn’t be helpful and perhaps would draw criticism as being unnecessary” because of the drought in regional NSW.

• A former director of strategy in Ms Berejiklian’s office, Brad Burden, also gave evidence. In an email also sent on August 20, 2018, about the recital hall plan, Mr Burden told Mr Harley and others: “We need the full $20 million team.” He said that this must have reflected the wishes of Ms Berejiklian herself or her chief of staff, Sarah Cruickshank.
• The state government subsequently announced the $20 million funding commitment during the by-election. The ICAC has previously heard this was in the nature of a “reservation” of funds subject to certain conditions, and not a guaranteed grant. The conservatorium to date has not received this money as NSW bureaucrats subsequently identified deficiencies in the business plan for the recital hall.
• Mr Burden said he first became aware of the Berejiklian-Maguire relationship after Ms Berejiklian gave evidence at the ICAC last year. Asked what he would have done differently if he had known about the relationship, Mr Burden said he thought “advice would have been sought around any potential conflicts of interest and how to manage them”.
• Both Mr Harley and Mr Burden agreed with one of Ms Berejiklian’s barristers, Sophie Callan, SC, that Ms Berejiklian was a principled decision-maker. Mr Harley added that he had never met a politician “more fiercely committed to public service”. Neither could recall Ms Berejiklian acting partially towards Mr Maguire in her decision-making.

The hearing resumes tomorrow at 9.30am with evidence from a NSW bureaucrat, Gary Barnes. He is not accused of wrongdoing.

As the ICAC has heard, Ms Berejiklian and Mr Maguire were in a secret relationship between 2015 and 2018.

Ms Cruickshank gave surprise evidence earlier today that Ms Berejiklian told her in a phone call on July 13, 2018, that she had been in a historical relationship with Mr Maguire.

The then-premier claimed the relationship had ended before she was appointed to the top job in January 2017, Ms Cruickshank said.

“It was about the optics,” Ms Cruickshank said of her concern about the relationship.

One of Ms Berejiklian’s barristers, Sophie Callan, SC, pressed Ms Cruickshank again about whether she had mis-remembered or misinterpreted what Ms Berejiklian said to her about the duration of the relationship.

“She was categorically clear with me; it was before she was premier,” Ms Cruickshank replied.

She said “the reality is” Ms Berejiklian told her in 2018 that it was a historical relationship that ended pre-January 2017, when in fact that was not the case.

Ms Berejiklian has yet to give evidence in the inquiry. She has denied all wrongdoing.

Ms Cruickshank said she was “very surprised and slightly mortified” after the call because she had “given some free character assessments of Mr Maguire” after his appearance at the ICAC.

The ICAC heard in October last year that the relationship between Ms Berejiklian and Mr Maguire in fact started in 2015 and didn’t end until sometime in 2018. Ms Cruickshank said she was “surprised” when she heard this evidence.

Asked what she would have done differently if she had been aware of this at the time, Ms Cruickshank said: “I would have sat down with her and gone through whether or not there were implications for things she had done.”

She said that she would have told Mr Maguire that Ms Berejiklian should not be involved in decision-making in relation to his proposals and she should be kept at arm’s length.

But she said she had never seen anything to indicate favouritism on Ms Berejiklian’s part towards Mr Maguire.

Ms Cruickshank is taken to evidence she gave at a private hearing with the ICAC earlier this year.

She said at the time that her reaction would have been different if Ms Berejiklian had told her the relationship was ongoing, and she would have thought “how on earth can we have a by-election” when Ms Berejiklian had been dating the “fellow” whose resignation triggered the poll.

Ms Cruickshank said today that she can’t recall what she meant by that precise expression but said “it’s a different level of political controversy”. A current relationship “would then have become a focus” in light of the scandal surrounding Mr Maguire at the time.

She said it would have had “potential repercussions for the premier” if she was involved with someone who had a “cloud” hanging over them.

Ms Berejiklian has denied all wrongdoing and is slated to give evidence at the ICAC from Friday.

Ms Berejiklian told the ICAC last year that the relationship started in 2015 and did not end until 2018.

Ms Cruickshank said that staff were told after Mr Maguire’s appearance at the ICAC in 2018 that if they had “things to report about Mr Maguire they should”.

She said that she subsequently learnt that two separate reports were given by two different staff members as a result of that.

In a briefing for the then-premier, which the inquiry heard was annotated by her in July 2018 , the Department of Premier and Cabinet advised Ms Berejiklian that it had been contacted by one staff member about information that might have been relevant to the earlier ICAC inquiry. It had also been informed that “there may be former staff members who may also hold relevant information”.

“DPC has advised the staff member that the information should be promptly provided to ICAC,” the briefing said.

Under recommendations, the department said: “Note that DPC has been informed that a Ministerial advisor holds information that may be relevant to [the earlier inquiry] ... and that the Secretary of DPC will provide that information to ICAC.”

“I received a phone call from the premier asking me to call her,” Ms Cruickshank said. She recalled that she was at dinner at the time, on the evening of July 13.

Ms Cruickshank said Ms Berejiklian was concerned that people might have seen her out with Mr Maguire and her office might receive questions from the media about whether the pair were close or friends.

It was described to her as a historical relationship or friendship before Ms Berejiklian became NSW premier in January 2017, and not a relationship that had continued. Ms Cruickshank is not sure whether the word relationship was used.

On that basis, Ms Cruickshank did not believe that any disclosures needed to be made.

Ms Berejiklian told the ICAC last year that the relationship started in 2015 and continued until 2018.