Berejiklian rightly reminds Labor of its record on corruption. But the Liberals have failed to learn from it

Gladys Berejiklian insists she has done nothing wrong, that she separated her role as premier from her close personal relationship with the disgraced former MP Daryl Maguire.

“If I had done something wrong I would be the first one to do that [resign]. If I had done something wrong I would be the first one to consider my position. But I haven’t,” she said.

“Had I known then what I know now, clearly I would not have made those personal decisions that I did.”

But what was her obligation as the leader of a political party? What role does she play as premier in setting the ethical framework of a government?

Thanks to excruciating telephone intercepts of their private conversations we know that the relationship lasted over five years, during which Maguire often told her of the business deals he was doing and his plans to escape a mountain of debt through deals with developers that involved commissions.

The relationship continued after the Independent Commission against Corruption announced Maguire had a case to answer and Berejiklian asked him to resign from the party and the parliament.

Berejiklian says she assumed he had declared his interests as required. She says she never took any decision to benefit him and that it appears the public servants didn’t either. To date there is no evidence that has emerged to cast doubt on this.

But what does it say about trust in the government she presides over?

It’s worth reflecting on New South Wales Labor’s appalling record in dealing with corruption during the nearly two decades it was in office.

The former NSW premier Bob Carr was fond of dining out on the story of how he had removed the disgraced politician Eddie Obeid from his ministry, which resulted in the destruction of an antique chair in his office. He told the anecdote as proof that he had been tough on Eddie.

But having returned Obeid to the backbench, Carr left the Labor powerbroker free to run a kind of salon of influence from his parliamentary office, where property developers sought favourable council decisions and his family’s extensive business interests flourished, often with the help of favourable government decisions.

Despite a string of investigative reports in the Sydney Morning Herald, Carr arguably turned a blind eye to the many red flags about Obeid’s behaviour.

He even gave Obeid a character reference when Obeid successfully sued the Herald for defamation in 2006.

Obeid, along with his son Moses and fellow Labor minister Ian Macdonald is now defending himself in a trial for conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.

This follows three separate investigations and findings of corrupt conduct against Obeid in Icac.

The Liberals have rightly reminded Labor of its record on corruption in public office yet they seem to have failed to learn what contributed to it.

Part of it was a blind refusal on the part of Labor’s leaders to recognise the danger signs, to enforce ministerial standards, to treat disclosure rules seriously and to exercise scepticism about those in their own party.

Carr was committed to the Labor cause, of that there was no doubt. Like Berejiklian he would say he served the people of NSW with all his energies. But his apparent blind spot toward his colleagues cost NSW dearly.

Berejiklian’s backbenchers appear to befree to conduct other businesses while in parliament provided there is no conflict with their day jobs. This includes taking commissions from property developers.

On Tuesday she said the ministerial standards were set before she arrived and they allow politicians to have second jobs.

But once this is permitted, it means that someone, arguably the boss, has to ensure that the standards are met and conflicts avoided.