Good thing she left

It strikes me that they were mismatched if  she now feels this way about his writing, and feels the need to sign statutory declarations stating she's not fibbing.

I'm not defending Bolt who's made  a clumsy blunder, but by golly, shouldn't the ex-fiance have kept mum about her relationship if it was all so painful and she'd moved on?

While I do not read Andrew's articles (I find that kind of journalism distasteful), I had become aware that a number of people had suffered nasty verbal attacks from followers of his blog, and also knew that some of my clients who abhor his views would be horrified by my previous association with him.

When the article was promoted on The Monthly's website, Anne contacted me to say Andrew had publicly denied that he had ever had a fiancee. I was shocked to the core, and immediately agreed to provide a statutory declaration and to show that I had evidence in Andrew's written correspondence.

I don't know how people found out who she was, I wouldn't  bother it doesn't interest me, but there'd probably be people out there who would expose her name to create mischief for Bolt and/or for her. Perhaps she would have benefited from keeping it quiet and not pursuing the matter publicly. If she had issues with her ex-fiance after twenty five years had passed and they'd both married it would have been an idea for her to contact him privately - or just let it lie.

Read the article at The Age. If you don't want to read it at the age...

It is with great reluctance that I feel I must make a public response following the recent profile of Andrew Bolt in The Monthly magazine. I am the woman who Anne Summers refers to as Andrew Bolt's former girlfriend and fiancee.
I want to set the record straight, following Andrew's public denial of the status of our relationship and the fact that my name has been made public against my wishes.


I met Andrew around 1980 when we were both working at The Age. He was a cadet journalist and I was working as an editorial assistant and secretary. I also worked as a belly dancer to help fund my studies to become a teacher. Since leaving The Age and working as a teacher I have progressed into a number of management roles in the public sector, and since completing my MBA and qualifying as a professional coach, I have been working as a business consultant, career strategist and executive coach.

Andrew and I lived together for the best part of six years in the early '80s and during that time we became engaged. Our relationship was no secret among family, friends and former colleagues at The Age. I ended the relationship, but Andrew and I have had occasional, cordial contact over the years. I was therefore shocked and insulted to see a demeaning reference to our relationship in the IPA Review in January, in which he claimed he had been ''a minder for a belly dancer'' who was his ''then girlfriend''.

I immediately contacted Andrew via email, under the subject line "Rewriting History", stating that I was "shocked, disappointed and hurt to see myself referred to, in a fleeting reference, merely as a 'belly dancer' and to you as my 'minder' ''.

''This is totally absurd, and inaccurate, as you well know,'' I wrote. ''I cannot imagine why you would want to reduce our six-year relationship, during which we were engaged, to this. I can only imagine that it was to gratuitously add some spice to your established conservative persona.''

Andrew promptly responded, and did not deny that we had been engaged: ''I do apologise. I was trying to amuse, and should have realised it might offend you - even though I gave no indication of your identity … I'm mortified to have unintentionally hurt you …''


I replied: ''Whilst I accept your explanation that you did not intentionally set out to hurt me, I wonder why you would set out to 'amuse' at someone else's expense …


''Even more important is the impact that this has had on me. It is as though a chapter of your life has been intentionally omitted …


''I am pleased that you are happily married and appear to have found some peace and satisfaction at last, as I certainly have.''


Andrew's response reads in part: ''I may be forgetful, I may be careless. You know perfectly well what a duffer I can be. But I have not suddenly become so mean that I would knowingly make a joke at your expense … Nor am I trying to wipe you from the record of my life …''


When Anne Summers contacted me, interested in my recollections of Andrew, I agreed to speak with her because of her established reputation, I wanted to put the public record straight, and on the basis that my anonymity would be maintained. I did not divulge any personal details about Andrew or his family.

While I do not read Andrew's articles (I find that kind of journalism distasteful), I had become aware that a number of people had suffered nasty verbal attacks from followers of his blog, and also knew that some of my clients who abhor his views would be horrified by my previous association with him.


When the article was promoted on The Monthly's website, Anne contacted me to say Andrew had publicly denied that he had ever had a fiancee. I was shocked to the core, and immediately agreed to provide a statutory declaration and to show that I had evidence in Andrew's written correspondence.


I still have the engagement ring Andrew gave me, as well as a Claddagh ring (Irish wedding ring) that he sent me from Dublin, with his hand-written message: ''With the heart worn down, pointing towards the hand it's an engagement ring; worn up, a wedding ring. Wear it down for now; we'll alter its position when I get back, if you don't mind.''


I am at a loss to understand why Andrew would want to deny our engagement. It is all so silly, and ancient history, which Andrew could have chosen to leave in the past, had he not made an inaccurate and self-serving public reference to our relationship. This issue has been fuelled by Andrew, who created the situation in the first place and who has since made himself out to be the victim.


Andrew claimed on his blog that he was unaware that he had had a fiancee. This seems more like selective amnesia. It is though he is intentionally attempting to rewrite history.
 I do not know what has happened to the Andrew I knew so well. The person he has become bears no resemblance to the ethical, highly principled and idealistic young man I loved.

I find it difficult to reconcile Andrew's public image with his private persona, and can only conclude that they have become enmeshed. I understand he recently claimed he had been made into a monster by the media. It seems to me that he has, in fact, created his own monster.