Some political observers and party figures argue that the current ICAC inquiry into the NSW Liberal Party is being weaponized as a tool for internal factional warfare. From this perspective, the focus on high-profile figures like Angus Taylor is seen as a calculated attempt to damage the reputation of conservative leaders rather than a genuine pursuit of corruption. Supporters of this view contend that the inquiry has been used to air internal grievances and personal attacks, such as the circulation of disparaging documents, which they argue should be handled through internal party processes rather than a state-funded anti-corruption commission.
This argument emphasizes that the allegations against Taylor are based on speculative text messages and hearsay rather than concrete evidence of financial misconduct. By dragging federal figures into a state-level investigation, critics of the inquiry suggest that the process risks becoming a political spectacle that distracts from the actual work of governance. They point to the fact that Taylor has consistently denied the claims and that no evidence of illegal payments has been produced, suggesting that the primary goal of these revelations is to create negative headlines and undermine the standing of the conservative wing of the party.
Furthermore, those who view the inquiry as a 'hit job' argue that it sets a dangerous precedent where political opponents can use the investigative powers of the state to settle scores. They maintain that the focus on the Reformers' internal activities, while potentially unseemly, does not necessarily constitute the kind of systemic corruption that ICAC was designed to uncover. For these stakeholders, the inquiry represents an overreach that threatens to erode public trust in both the Liberal Party and the integrity of the anti-corruption process itself.