I personally think it's very sad that after a lifetime of service, her end will result from her error of judgement. Judgement, being a strong point of hers throughout her career, until recent times it appears. All of her good work forgotten and she herself cast to shame pile forever.
We have yet to see the results of the Finance Departments review into her expenses. I hope they find nothing untoward, but there are no guarantees. If she has been found to have broken the law, then she must face the consequences. But even if she has been found to have operated within the current rules, the damage has been done. She has been mortally wounded, the attackers have won.
It would be fair to say some of the vitriol stems from political point scoring. Labor have been after her from the day she stepped into The Speakers chair. Some stems from disappointment in our politicians. And, some simply because people join in the fray; the shark pack mentality that we see all too often today. "Go for the kill."
Mrs Bishop herself has conducted herself with dignity. She has apologised and paid back the money, plus a fine. Not once has she screamed bullying (although she has just grounds). Not once has screamed misogynist (although again, she has just grounds).
But in thinking about this and how we judge others, it begs the question. How many people critising Mrs Bishop have never cheated on their expenses? I'm sure if you checked mine might turn up the odd questionable item. It might have been legitimate under the rules, but applying the fairness test might result in a different response, dependent on whom you ask. Of course the cry will go up 'but in her case it's my money' - well it's always someones money be it tax payers, shareholders, business owners. It issue is about the application of standards not whose money it is.
Which brings me back to my point. What's hidden in my 'closet of failures'.
I'm thinking perhaps there is an element of truth in that.
