Graham Richardson asks the question:
… you have to wonder what prompted the Abbott government to set up a royal commission that could spend millions of dollars to work out that Gillard could never be charged with an offence.
This was a royal commission set up to get someone who was already got.
History will not be kind to her and it is doubtful she has the panache and overpowering intellect of a Gough Whitlam or a Paul Keating, who would rebuild themselves after humiliating election defeats. Surely that is penalty enough. Surely that was enough for her to deal with.
Okay. Fair point.
But, but, but … Richardson should have quit while he was ahead. He finishes off with
Royal commissions are expensive. Really good journalists are so much cheaper.
Another good point – but then I thought about Glenn Milne, hounded from his job at the Australian, fired from the ABC. Michael Smith sacked from Fairfax, and then the Frankenstein Media Inquiry.
Then I realised why Royal Commissions may well be more valuable, albeit more expensive, than good journalists.
Gillard got to answer questions about her involvement in fraudulent activities twenty years ago under oath without there being any threats or intimidation against the person asking the questions. As it turns out her involvement appears to have been peripheral.
So while Richardson craps on about “abuse of process” the real issue is why Gillard used her office and state power to threaten and intimidate journalists trying to get to the bottom of a story?