Even though Chris Ronalds did not interview all who may have observed the incident, she found that she was more inclined to believe Ms Sanger's version of the events. On that basis, the Premier removed Tony Stewart from Cabinet. Two things happened to Stewart from this - he lost a prestigious position and very likely any chance to further advance in politics; but more importantly I am sure, he had his reputation damaged, perhaps irreparably.
Assuming that Stewart carried out the actions he was accused of, that may be fair. Unfortunately, the process that Rees used was clearly a quasi judicial process more akin to a "kangaroo court" than a proper inquiry. Tony Stewart was in my opinion denied natural justice and procedural fairness. Whether or not that is the legal case will be decided by the Supreme Court unless the Premier takes other action acceptable to Stewart to head off a Court ruling.
I know Tony Stewart to say hello to only. I have no idea of what he is like as a person but have never seen or heard anything to question his character. If the Premier had other reasons for wanting to remove Stewart as a Minister then he should have just done so. Ministers can be promoted or demoted and while there may be a political need to find some justification for it, that would surely be better than to use a process that has destroyed a mans reputation and hurt not just him, but also his family. In trying to show that he is firmly in control, Nathan Rees once again showed that he is still very much serving an apprenticeship. Tony Stewart has every right to be angry.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.