Friday 21 July 2006 6.17pm
Next you'll be telling us she deliberately tried to lose the election as part of some cunning masterplan.
Not really my point. Point is at whatever time she left office, is it ethically reasonable for her to immediately turn to influence peddling.
Who are constituents expected to think she was serving in office, in this situation?
So I dont think its relevant whether she resigned or was rejected in election. In either case she can still have had plans to ingratiate herself with these folks for a time when she would leave.
This sort of thing is increasingly common and it stinks. Its even worse with minsiters, who have a direct role in handing out all sorts of contracts to private companies and then join their boards in highly paid roles shortly after. Not coincicentally most of these companies provide very poor service.
I would think that Southward voters would have a right to ask same questions here.