Fiona Nash was taught a few things and a bit more about politics from one of the canniest men in the NSW parliament.
Ian Armstrong was old-school Nationals. Not quite Country Party, but with a foot in the camp of the modern party and another in its roots.
As a deputy premier, he knew when to stonewall and when to fold his cards. And he could talk for a long time - hardly surprising, given his background as a stock and station agent.
Nash, the surprise possible first ministerial casualty of the Abbott government, needs all those skills as she fends off allegations of misleading parliament.
Labor thinks something stinks about the influence Alastair Furnival has had in the office of the assistant health minister and senator.
Before becoming chief of staff for Nash, Furnival worked for Cadbury and was a director and shareholder in his wife's lobbying company, Australian Public Affairs (APA).
A requirement of his appointment as Nash's most senior adviser was he divest his interest in the company.
He also provided undertakings - in writing, Nash says - that APA would not lobby her, Health Minister Peter Dutton or any other minister on health-related issues.
Nash admitted to a Senate hearing this week that she had known Furnival for 10 years and was aware of his links to APA and the clients it represented, especially in the food-processing industry.
But that's not what she told the Senate on February 11 when asked about the sudden removal of a health star rating website, which was opposed by the industry.
Labor Senate leader Penny Wong wanted to know what role Furnival played in its removal and about his relationship with APA.
Nash insisted her chief of staff was acting on her direction.
And on APA? Nash was definite: "There is no connection, whatsoever, between my chief of staff and the company Australian Public Affairs. My chief of staff has no connection with the food industry and is simply doing his job as my chief of staff."
A few hours later, the minister backtracked and acknowledged there was a connection. Furnival was still a shareholder in the company.
Not surprisingly, Nash admitted the next day that the prime minister's office had become involved in the issue.
Under questioning in the Senate, Nash also conceded that Furnival did not declare an interest when he took part in a meeting of the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation in December, despite it being a requirement for all ministers, staff and officials taking part.
Veteran Labor senator John Faulkner was not impressed, arguing Nash had misled parliament with her initial statement.
"We now know that the government's statement of standards for ministerial staff has been breached," he told the Senate, adding it was an open-and-shut case.
By the end of week, Furnival was gone on his pretext that media coverage about the issue was doing damage to the government.
Tony Abbott told parliament that Furnival went for other reasons, including being "dilatory" in divesting his interest in APA.
And what was the big crime anyway, he asked in response to repeated opposition questions about what he knew about Furnival and the staffer's apparent conflict of interest.
"This is not so much a storm in a teacup, it's not even a zephyr in a thimble - it's nothing," he told parliament.
The prime minister argued there was plenty of Labor smoke, but no coalition fire, especially following a three-hour grilling of Nash during a Senate estimates hearing earlier in the day.
Labor is not convinced, but nor is it calling for the minister's head.
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten believes there are more questions for the government to answer, especially about its decision to give Cadbury $16 million to upgrade a visitors centre at its Hobart plant.
Furnival, in his previous job, had secured $400,000 from the Tasmanian government and was front and centre when Abbott announced coalition backing during the election campaign.
"Something absolutely stinks about this," says Labor health spokeswoman Catherine King.
Her shadow cabinet colleague Anthony Albanese agrees, citing his time as regional development minister.
While it was well known the then government was seeking a broad range of submissions for job-creation projects in Tasmania, not one had come from Cadbury.
"There wasn't any lobbying or any submission received," Albanese said. "No approach to me as minister at all from Cadbury."
Nash, in ordinary circumstances, would not be high on Labor's list of ministerial targets.
Wong and Faulkner concede that Nash is seen as one of the coalition's better-liked figures.
"I am genuinely disappointed to have to say that these revelations represent serious negligence in her conduct with respect to her ministerial responsibilities," Faulkner told parliament.
Nash survives for the moment because Labor can't quite find the nails for her ministerial coffin.
As well, Abbott is backing her "to the hilt", insisting Nash has done nothing wrong and all her decisions are "eminently justifiable".
"The matter is dead," he says.
