Former Principal Bruce Leadbetter has found his spine and hit back at DBP and also at Cullen.
Former Bayfield High School head Bruce Leadbetter last night reaffirmed that he had told Mr Benson-Pope about a complaint over him entering the female bathroom, where two girls were showering, and a girls dormitory, where girls were dressing, at a school camp in 1997.
DBP continues to deny he did anything wrong…..and he doesn’t recall the incident.
Well let me tell you as someone who has been subject to an investigation into ones actions, you don’t fucking forget it.
I still remember the inquiry, the embarrasment, the feeling of hopelessness of the situation. Eventually when you are cleared as I was you still feel put through the ringer, and let me tell you, I remember every detail of it like it was yesterday…..and yes Prime minister I can remember it (with amazing clarity) even though it was 8 years ago.
Just so the innuendo and questions do not build about me, I was accused of kicking a 14 year old Scout on the backside at a Scout Jamboree. I was reported by a third party, still unknown to me who was more than 100 metres from the "incident" and despite the support of several other leaders and scouts who were within 10m I was still put through the ringer.
Fair enough, appearances are everything and I put myself in what appeared to be an inappropriate situation, but the point I make is that you don’t forget, not ever. Further my situation pales into insignificance compared to DBP’s long list of proven and alleged crimes of assault, bullying and lying. Further I know of one other blogger who can testify to the ability to remember past investigations that occured sometime into the past about inappropriate behaviour.
Anyway back to Mr Leadbetter and whether he was "confused" as alleged by Cullen, who by all accounts is becoming increasingly confused himself arouns th halls of parliament.
However, Mr Leadbetter said he raised the actual complaint, not just "policy issues", with Mr Benson-Pope and added there was no possibility he was confused about what happened.
And what about his so-called apology. Since when can you say sorry but believe that you did no wrong and also acknowledge "genuinely" held concerns.
Either they were concerns or not concerns, these in the ministers own words were "genuinely" held concerns, therefore they occured and they were genuine and therefore he acted inappropriately.
But ultimately he should be held accoutnable not for what he did then, but rather how he has acted since. How he has acted and reacted is the most telling. He has acted like a bully, maligning those who accuse. He has acted like a liar, spinning and obfuscating his way ineptly around the issue. He lied to the Parrliament. He continues to fess up and admit the inappropriateness of his conduct then and now.
This man is not fit to be a Minister of the Crown and i would argue he is not fit to be an MP.