The from office of ROLAND ROCCHICCIOLI

I was alarmed to read of the serious assault charge levelled at Matthew Guy MP. Reactively, I was disinclined to believe. The Matthew Guy I know is good and decent. He is an honourable man.

It would be grandstanding to call Mr. Guy a close friend. He is what I call a familiar — someone whom I know, whom I like a great deal, and whose company and contact I enjoy. Together with a mutual friend, we shared an agreeable lunch in Ballarat.

The Victorian Premier’s, and the State Attorney-General’s, swiftness to score political points from the unfortunate and profoundly distressing accusation which has enveloped Mr. Guy and his family — most importantly his wife and children — is both wrong and regrettable. Their behaviour should be censured, not judged a political victory. However irresistible the temptation to scratch the political itch, one should hesitate, be confidently cognisant of the facts, and in fairness have viewed the evidence. Groping blindly for imaginary dark shadows — in pursuit of political point scoring — is disgraceful. It tells more about the detractors than the controversy. Too often, presumption of innocence is discarded for an ignoble ‘gotcha’ moment.

When Premier Jacinta Allan’s husband was charged with drink-driving at nine o’clock in the morning, I elected — respectfully — not to make comment. The premier, her husband, and her children have a right to a private life — to be protected from the media intrusion which inevitably follows such an offence.

The Opposition Leader, Jess Wilson, said drink-driving was unacceptable and serious. She added — with an abundance of political grace others might ape: “But I’m not going to comment on the premier’s family. It’s not who I am to comment on someone else’s family, and she’s addressed those issues this morning.”

There are epiphanic moments in a civilised society when one should find reason to pause — to keep a civil tongue; to moderate the language; and to exercise caution with barbative opinions about other people which do nothing to advance the narrative, and serve only to contaminate public opinion.

A paucity of good manners notwithstanding, the lack of regard exhibited by some for life’s fellow travellers is disconcerting. The political appetite to belittle those who hold an opposing viewpoint — regardless of consequences — deserves the full weight of public opprobrium.

In all areas of public life we should expect less obfuscating and more restrained comment. We should articulate the disappointment at inappropriate commentary from politicians who ought know better. Irrefutably, the quality of your life is determined by the quality of your thinking. Staying in power — regardless of methodology or consequences — should not be the prevailing modus operandi. Reaction without proof is why some politicians are held in such low public esteem. Just as we should be studiously mindful of their privacy, they should be seen to reciprocate — to behave accordingly. With public office comes responsibility — an opportunity to become the paladins ennobling the public discourse for greater good.

Victoria Police Chief Commissioner examined CCTV footage of Mr. Guy’s encounter, stating there was “no offence detected”. Perhaps in the future detractors might be less eager to believe the worst and more inclined to reach into the cornucopia of political civility. There is nothing noble in being superior to other people. True nobility is being superior to your former self. It could start with public apologies to Mr Guy and his family.

That would be civil.

Contact: [email protected]