After all the twists and turns of the Hollingworth saga will anyone ever again want to be the Governor–General of Australia? From now on we can expect a close scrutiny of the previous career path, professional decisions and personal relationships of any proposed incumbent for the office.

In this age where there is a continuing growth in the nation’s sense of participative democracy – that is, every citizen feels they have a right for their voice to be heard in any matter – then any publicly elected official, including the Prime Minister, will think twice before they appoint anyone to high public office. In the end we may be left with a field of low key, almost anonymous holders of public office, for example members of the judiciary and the defence forces, to be Governors-General and State Governors.

Participative democracy, which is especially the catch cry of the Greens, many Democrats, and Labor and media lefties, may end up not just turning people away from public office, but it may also bring about considerable damage to the major institutions of authority in our society. We see this heralded as well these days in public responses to many judicial decisions.

Of course not all such appointments have been as problematic in the community’s view as our present Governor-General. For every NSW citizen will agree that Premier Carr made a superb choice for Governor of NSW when he appointed Professor Marie Bashir AC.

Rumour has it that when the time came to appoint a successor to Sir William Deane Prime Minister Howard wanted to be the first PM to appoint a female G-G, but his chosen person, who had recently become Chairman of the Qantas Board politely and firmly turned down his offer.

So we were left with the great debate on whether the separation of Church and State was challenged when Archbishop Peter Holling-worth from the Anglican diocese of Brisbane was appointed. Many people have overlooked the fact that he was not the first Archbishop to be a Governor- General in the Commonwealth. That privilege goes to Sir Paul Reeves, a former Archbishop of Auckland and Primate of the Anglican Church in New Zealand. His time in office was successful and his part-Maori ancestry meant that he was able to do a good deal to lead his nation into healing relationships between Maori and Pakeha New Zealanders.

Premier Bob Carr said recently that the whole controversy surrounding Dr Peter Hollingworth was a Church and State matter. This is totally erroneous and an unusual slip-up for the politically astute NSW Premier. This matter is not about Church and State, it is essentially about public demands for the appropriate dealing by all authorities with proven perpetrators of child sexual abuse. If similar allegations were made against a Governor-General who had formerly been an academic, a judge or a politician there would be the same public outcry.

Professor Patrick Parkinson in his excellent book Child Sexual Abuse and the Churches: Understand the Issues has a moving phrase in the first chapter that describes the life of former child victims who have kept silent about their experience.

He says they “suffer in the loneliness of silence, grieving the time when they first lost their belief that the world is a safe place and that adults will protect them from harm” (page 1). It is this suffering, loneliness and grief that the community will no longer tolerate. Leaders in all institutions, including the churches, have to act decisively against perpetrators so that they no longer are in a position where they can abuse the trust and innocence of dependent children.

Peter Hollingworth has reminded us at times of a defenceless fox driven to search desperately for safety from a pack of savage hounds. Media looking for more stories and new angles, politicians wanting to score a point against the PM, republicans wanting an end to the monarchy, and perhaps even atheists desiring to damage the churches and Christian faith are all pursuing him.

Yet the report that was handed to Archbishop Phillip Aspinall by his Board of Enquiry does indicate that there was at least one very poor decision made by Aspinall’s predecessor, Hollingworth, that allowed a perpetrator, Elliot to remain in ministry after he made admissions about abuse of young children. The report says that though there was no demur from the other bishops Hollingworth consulted, the matter “was not handled fairly, reasonably or appropriately”.

The report also contained some critical comments about the refusal by Ms Hetty Johnstone of Bravehearts Inc to appear before the Board on the grounds of her problems with the indemnity cover offered. Her arguments were conclusively demolished by the Board, though there has been little reference to this in media reports. The Board also saw the need to recommend discussions between school authorities and the Queensland police to ensure best practice in co-operation between them in the aftermath of the discovery of child sexual abuse. Though I have read widely I have seen no discussion of this in media reporting.

Perhaps above all the Hollingworth saga demonstrates the power of the ‘fourth estate’, the media, in contemporary society. At times it is to be feared.