Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:

(1) Two formal complaints have been finalised by the SBS Ombudsman. The complainants were Ta Ann Tasmania and Hydro Tasmania. The SBS Ombudsman's responses to each complaint are set out below. SBS notes that the SBS Ombudsman's responses have been published by SBS on the Dateline program website and are also available on the Ta Ann Tasmania and Hydro Tasmania websites

Ta Ann Tasmania – The SBS Ombudsman reported:

"I write in response to your formal complaint dated 23 August 2012 in relation to the Dateline report The Last Frontier broadcast on 21 August 2012.

"After a review of the program against the provisions of Code 2.2 (Accuracy, Impartiality and Balance) of the SBS Codes of Practice, and considering your complaint, the program was found to have breached the provisions of the code.

"The report was found to be inaccurate in two of three areas identified in your complaint.

"First, Mr Rolley did not say the words attributed to him about plantation and regrowth timber. Secondly, as you know, there is a difference between a contract to log, that is go into an area and fell trees, and a contract for the supply logs from trees felled (logged) by others. In this case, Forestry Tasmania supplies Ta Ann Tasmania (a manufacturing company) with already felled timber, which Ta Ann Tasmania processes to produce a range of timber products. It is inaccurate, and in breach of Code 2.2, to say that Ta Ann Tasmania is a logging company.

"I find that the report that 50 workers were retrenched was not inaccurate, being an accurate reflection of what was said by Mr Rolley. It is not inaccurate to say that Ta Ann Tasmania

"retrenched 50 Tasmanian workers" when Ta Ann Tasmania's executive director said that "we've had to sack 50 people".

"On balance the report breached Code 2.2 with respect to accuracy, balance and impartiality. Put shortly, the program did not include accurate and balancing material that was available and did not include a response from Ta Ann on key questions. It unduly favoured the views critical of Ta Ann (both Ta Ann Tasmania and Ta Ann Holdings Berhad, the Malaysian company) and "Hydro Tasmania over both the facts and appropriate balancing views. In addition the relationship between Hydro Tasmania and with Sarawak Energy Berhad (SEB) was misreported and misrepresented. I consider that the totality of the report was inaccurate and misleading.

"On 28 August 2012 The Executive Producer of Dateline, Peter Charley, informed you that a change would be made to the program and transcript in relation to the removal of the words "and regrowth". However, SBS now considers that in light of this finding that it will broadcast a correction and apology on Dateline 4th September 2012. The wording of the correction is a management matter and not a duty of the SBS Ombudsman."

Hydro Tasmania – The SBS Ombudsman reported:

"I write in response to your formal complaint dated 27 August 2012 in relation to the Dateline report The Last Frontier broadcast on 21 August 2012.

"After a review of the program against the provisions of Code 2.2 (Accuracy, Impartiality and Balance) of the SBS Codes of Practice, I found that the program was inaccurate as identified in your complaint.

"The statements made about the role of Hydro Tasmania are not accurate. The annual reports of Hydro Tasmania for 2009 to 2010 and 2010 to 2011 are available online. The annual reports reveal that Hydro Tasmania's connection with the Sarawak Energy Board is that Hydro Tasmania provides consultancy and training services through its consulting services business, Entura. That was not correctly and fairly reported.

"Further, the totality of the report was inaccurate and misleading. On balance I find that the report breached Code 2.2 in respect of accuracy, balance and impartiality. The relationship between Hydro Tasmania and with Sarawak Energy Berhad was misreported and misrepresented.

"Put shortly, the program did not include accurate and balancing material that was available, and unduly favoured the views critical of Ta Ann (both Ta Ann Tasmania and Ta Ann Holdings Berhad, the Malaysian company) and Hydro Tasmania over both the facts and appropriate balancing views.

"SBS's apologises to Hydro Tasmania for the impact of this breach of the SBS Codes of Practice. In light of this finding SBS will broadcast a correction and apology on Dateline 4th September, 2012. The wording of the correction is a management matter and is not a duty of the SBS Ombudsman."

(2) Dateline accepted that there were inaccuracies in the report and issued an apology on air on the Dateline program on SBS ONE on 4 September 2012 (see below). The apology was also published on the Dateline website. Dateline has modified the program in response to issues raised in the complaints, including removing or correcting the errors.

On 4th September 2012, Dateline issued the following on air and online clarification and apology regarding this story:

"Two weeks ago, Dateline broadcast a story on the construction of hydro-electric dams in the Malaysian state of Sarawak.

Dateline accepts the report overplayed the role of Hydro Tasmania in the dam building projects.

The same program contained a story on the company Ta Ann Tasmania.

The story quoted the company's executive director, Evan Rolley, as saying that 'Forestry Tasmania doesn't have enough plantation and regrowth timber to fulfil the Ta Ann contract'.

In fact, in his interview, Mr Rolley only referred to plantation timber.

Dateline also used the term 'logging' to describe Ta Ann Tasmania's activities. The company is not a logger, but a timber manufacturer.

Dateline apologises to Hydro Tasmania and to Ta Ann Tasmania for these inaccuracies."

(See: http://www.sbs.com.au/Dateline/story/related/aid/629/id/601522/n/The-Last-Frontier)

(3) SBS issued an apology and clarification on-air on 4 September 2012. Dateline also published the SBS Ombudsman's responses to the two formal complaints on its website.