NSW Liberal leader Kellie Sloane has declined to call for the resignation of Shadow Attorney General Damien Tudehope, opting to wait for the final determination of an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) inquiry. The decision comes amid intensifying pressure on the party leadership following testimony regarding the alleged manipulation of party branches.
The standoff centers on allegations of internal misconduct and the subsequent leaking of sensitive information. While Ms. Sloane has characterized the act of leaking as “never good,” she has resisted calls to remove Mr. Tudehope from his senior leadership role until the anti-corruption watchdog concludes its formal investigation.
The current controversy was catalyzed by testimony from Jean-Claude Perrottet, a figure associated with the Reformer movement and the younger brother of a former Liberal premier. Appearing before ICAC, Mr. Perrottet alleged that a specific group had engaged in the practice of signing up members to “dodgy” branches. These allegations suggest a systemic effort to manipulate party internals, a claim that strikes at the heart of the party’s democratic processes and internal governance.
The intersection of these branch-stacking allegations and the subsequent leak of information has created a volatile environment for the NSW Liberal leadership. The party now faces a dual crisis: the potential verification of institutional corruption via the ICAC process and the internal instability caused by the disclosure of confidential proceedings.
Analysis:
The decision by Kellie Sloane to defer action suggests a strategy of institutional reliance, leaning on the ICAC process to provide political cover before taking disciplinary steps. By framing the issue around the act of leaking while simultaneously waiting for a legal finding, the party leadership avoids a premature dismissal that could be overturned by the inquiry. However, this approach risks appearing reactive. By tethering the fate of the Shadow Attorney General to a legal outcome rather than a political or ethical standard, the leadership may be perceived as prioritizing legal technicalities over institutional integrity. Furthermore, the focus on “leaking” as a primary concern may be viewed as an attempt to shift the narrative away from the more substantive allegations of branch manipulation.
The significance of this delay extends beyond the individual fate of Damien Tudehope. The Shadow Attorney General holds a pivotal role in the opposition, tasked with scrutinizing the government’s legal and judicial frameworks. The cloud of an ICAC investigation, coupled with the leadership’s hesitation to act, potentially weakens the party’s ability to hold the current government accountable on issues of transparency and corruption.
The background of this conflict is rooted in long-standing tensions within the NSW Liberal Party, particularly between the moderate and conservative wings. The “Reformer” movement, represented in this instance by Jean-Claude Perrottet, has frequently clashed with the party establishment over the direction of the organization and the legitimacy of its internal voting blocs. Branch stacking—the practice of recruiting large numbers of members to a specific branch to influence pre-selections or policy votes—has been a recurring theme in the party’s internal struggles.
The involvement of ICAC elevates these internal disputes from party grievances to matters of public interest and legal scrutiny. ICAC possesses significant powers to compel testimony and uncover documentary evidence, meaning the findings will likely provide a definitive account of whether “dodgy” branches were indeed established and who was responsible for their coordination.
As the inquiry progresses, several key indicators will determine the trajectory of the NSW Liberal leadership. First, the specific nature of the evidence produced regarding Mr. Tudehope’s knowledge of or involvement in the alleged branch manipulation will be critical. If the evidence suggests a direct link to the Shadow Attorney General, the leadership’s “wait and see” approach will become politically untenable.
Second, the party must navigate the fallout of the “leaking” culture. Ms. Sloane’s assertion that leaking is “never good” suggests a desire to restore discipline within the ranks. However, if the leaks are perceived as whistleblowing intended to expose corruption, the leadership’s condemnation of such acts may be viewed as an attempt to suppress accountability.
Third, the reaction of the broader party membership will be a deciding factor. If the rank-and-file members perceive that the leadership is protecting a senior figure despite evidence of misconduct, it could trigger a wider internal revolt or further factional instability.
The conclusion of the ICAC inquiry will leave Kellie Sloane with little room for maneuver. A finding of corruption or serious misconduct would necessitate an immediate resignation to maintain the party’s credibility. Conversely, an exoneration would allow Mr. Tudehope to remain in his post, though the political damage from the public testimony may already be permanent.
For now, the NSW Liberal Party remains in a state of suspended animation, with its senior legal spokesperson under a cloud of suspicion and its leader relying on a third-party commission to dictate the timing of internal disciplinary action. The outcome will serve as a litmus test for how the party handles allegations of internal corruption in an era of increased public and regulatory scrutiny.
Sources:
The Guardian World: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/aug/05/nsw-liberal-leader-kellie-sloane-call-damien-tudehope-icac-leak-revelations-ntwnfb
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: The Guardian World — source
