Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a statement of not more than 10 minutes.

Leave granted.

It has been a difficult few weeks for the ABC, but its important work continues. The ABC is one of the important underpinnings of media diversity in Australia. The ABC represents a significant community contribution to civic journalism. It is important for the community to have confidence in the ABC and its independence.

Firstly, I would like to address the claims that the government has sought to undermine the ABC's independence through its budget, through reviews and through board appointments. All these claims are without basis. The ABC receives, and will continue to receive, more than a billion dollars a year. The ABC enjoys greater funding certainty than any other media organisation in Australia. It is well resourced and will continue to be. While it is correct that an indexation pause was foreshadowed in the last budget to be applied in the next triennium, it is modest and paired with an efficiency review. This represents good practice in what is a fast-evolving media environment. And it is appropriate that all Commonwealth agencies look to ensure that they are the best possible stewards of taxpayer dollars. This should be an uncontroversial proposition. Further, due to the changing media environment, a number of media organisations have posed questions about areas of public broadcaster activity that are often debated between commercial and public media. To provide a forum for these matters to be canvassed, the government established a competitive neutrality inquiry.

Finally, to the issue of board appointments: legislation provides for an independent panel process to be initiated for each board vacancy. This has occurred on each occasion. The relevant legislation also provides for appointments to be made apart from the panel recommendations. On some occasions, the government has appointed from the panel list; on others, it has made alternative appointments. Both parts are provided for in the legislation. All appointments have followed the legislated requirements: decisions have been taken by cabinet and appointments made by the Federal Executive Council. Contrary to some media reports, the former chair was chosen from the list of recommended names provided by the independent panel. At the time, the acting shadow minister for communications, Mr Dreyfus, said: 'Labor congratulates Justin Milne on his appointment as the new chair of the ABC. Mr Milne is certainly qualified for the role, given his extensive experience in and knowledge of the media industry.'

Now to more recent events in relation to the former managing director and the former chair: I should acknowledge that I had a professional relationship with both the former chair and the former managing director. I have always respected the legislated independence of the ABC and its board and management. As a consequence of the ABC's unique legislated standing and independence within my portfolio, I have not engaged with the chairs or managing directors of the ABC as frequently or as closely as is the case with other portfolio bodies. But I do want to be very clear and transparent about those occasions which relate to recent matters. The then chair spoke to me in Canberra on 12 September to advise that the board no longer believed the managing director was best placed to lead the organisation. He further advised that he would be conveying this to the managing director on behalf of the board the following day and, although not sure where this matter would land, he hoped that a mutually agreeable path could be found. I indicated to the chair that I respected the managing director's position was, under the legislation, a matter for the board. Given the uncertainty as to how this would conclude, and out of respect for the privacy of the managing director, I undertook not to further convey that information at that time. The former chair undertook to keep me apprised. I spoke to the chair a few days later, who advised that discussions with the managing director were ongoing. No further detail was provided. The former chair made contact with me on the evening of Sunday, 23 September to advise that the board had just met and had resolved to terminate the tenure of the managing director effective the following morning. Shortly afterwards, I advised the Prime Minister.

I should reiterate that the ABC board has legislated independence in management appointments and this decision was entirely a matter for the board of the ABC. This independence and the right of the board was recognised by me in a statement on Monday, 24 September, but also by the shadow minister on the same day, where she said:

Labor acknowledges the independent decision of the board in relation to the departure of Michelle Guthrie as managing director.

On 26 September, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that there had allegedly been an email exchange between the former chair and the former managing director in relation to the tenure of Ms Alberici. This report raised questions in relation to the independence of the ABC. In the course of the day I met with the Prime Minister, where I proposed, and it was agreed, that the secretary of the department of communications undertake an inquiry to establish the facts. Subsequent media reports, including in The Daily Telegraph the following day regarding Mr Probyn, also fell within the purview of the secretary's inquiry.

Let me be clear: prior to these media reports, I was not aware of the allegations of encounters between the former managing director and the former chair in relation to staffing matters. It is indicated by a statement on 26 September, and in a doorstop the following day, that I have never in any way, shape or form sought to involve myself in staffing matters, nor am I aware of any current or former member of the government seeking to do so.

I contacted the former chair on the afternoon of 26 September to advise that the secretary would be undertaking an inquiry to establish the facts. I issued a statement to that effect. The following morning, on 27 September, the chair advised me that he would be resigning. This was the appropriate decision by the former chair. It is important that individual board members not only uphold the independence but are seen to uphold the independence of the ABC. On 28 September the federal Executive Council appointed Dr Kirstin Ferguson as deputy chair. As a consequence, she serves as acting chair until the appointment of a substantive chair.

On 4 October the ABC board issued a statement which said:

To clarify various media reports, the Board received a letter from the former Managing Director late on Friday 21 September 2018. In that letter, Ms Guthrie responded to several issues that the Board raised with her. In addition, the former Managing Director raised other matters that she requested the Board investigate on a confidential basis.

The Board resolved on Sunday 23 September 2018 to appoint an external, independent expert advisor to investigate these matters.

On Thursday, 11 October, I received the report from the inquiry undertaken by the secretary of the department of communications. This report states that both the former chair and the former managing director advised the inquiry that, 'There was no request or suggestion by the former Prime Minister or any government minister to terminate the employment of a journalist or ABC staff member.'

Following receipt of the secretary's report, I have written to the acting chair conveying a copy of the report, suggesting that it be provided to the independent external review to assist their work. I have also sought the advice of the board as to the scope and time frames of the external independent expert adviser's investigation. In addition, I sought from the board their assurance that they have acted at all times to uphold the independence and integrity of the organisation. When I have further advice, I will convey it to the Senate. I table a copy of my statement, a copy of the report of the secretary and a copy of my correspondence to the acting chair of the ABC board.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

) ( ): by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the statement.

What we just saw there was an attempt at another whitewash. This is a government that has constantly been in the mode of attack over our great institution, the ABC. I state again, as our shadow assistant minister has said over and over: the ABC belongs to the Australian people; it does not belong to the Liberal Party.

In Minister Fifield's response today, he declared it's been a difficult few weeks. He tried to make out it's been a difficult few weeks for the ABC, but the reality is it's been a very difficult few weeks for this minister. What he's attempting this morning is to come in here and wipe the blood off his hands for all the damage he's done to the ABC—cleaning up after the scene of the crime of constant and persistent attacks on our national broadcaster. Platitudes followed his opening statement of his anxiety about this period in which he has abjectly failed as a minister of the Crown—platitudes about confidence in the ABC and confidence in its independence. This is a government that has attacked that great institution day in and day out: reviews after reviews; interference with appointments; and the minister himself writing on multiple occasions, complaining about the editorial nature of the work being undertaken by the ABC. Then he went on, in his speech, to go back to his usual standard line of: 'Nothing to see here. Let's be calm in response to this and let's talk about the money we've invested in the ABC.' The reality is they have not done well by the ABC. They have been subject to influence from those on the crossbench to attack the ABC, and it's something that they're very happy to do.

In his statement, the minister declared that he has had a number of discussions with the chair of the ABC and also with the former managing director, Ms Guthrie. He spoke to the chair all right! He's spoken to the chair on plenty of occasions, and he's spoken to the chair in such a way that the chair of the ABC walked away with the impression that he should sack a journalist because this minister had him so worried that there would be further attacks on the ABC if he didn't respond. That is the level of political interference that we are seeing from this government.

What we saw from the minister coming in here and trying to explain away the incidence of late September, where we saw an extraordinary attack on our national broadcaster, will simply not cut it. I don't have the benefit of having the minister's speech in front of me to interrogate each of the nonsense points that he's gone through, but the fact is he is here in denial of the reality that we know the ABC is completely under attack.

The Labor Party made its comments very, very clear, as of 26 September, that any internal inquiry—and I will acknowledge respect to the head of the department, Mr Mrdak—into the ABC as advocated by this government is a whitewash and nothing more. This attack on our national broadcaster is of such significance that we should have an independent inquiry. Labor has called immediately for a Senate inquiry. The ABC does not belong to the Liberals. It's not a plaything used by Minister Fifield when he wants to intimidate the journalists who want to tell the truth about the failures of this government and report with independence. The ABC is not a plaything for this government, yet that is how it's being used. A Senate inquiry is the only way that we can actually get to the bottom of what's being going on with this minister's hands-on, very aggressive interference with the ABC.

The situation in the last week of September went from worse to worse. By 28 September Labor made it clear that this minister and his response was so wholly inadequate that he has demonstrated, without doubt, that he's unfit to hold the role of a minister of the Crown. He is certainly unfit to continue in the role as the communications minister while this incredible attack on the ABC under his watch is still playing out. On 30 September Labor called, in the hope of getting to the truth, for a very important response, because we cannot allow this minister to continue doing what he's doing. We have to ask if this minister seriously believes that an inquiry by his own department's secretary has got any chance of restoring public confidence in the independence of our great national broadcaster. What we have seen from this government in this year alone is an attack on the ABC where they have cut $83.7 million. They've launched two damaging broadcasting inquiries, they've led a stream of complaints about ABC journalism and they are inconveniently faced with the reality that there are three bills before the parliament to meddle with the ABC Act and charter.

We have, in this minister, a man who comes in here with arrogance and hubris, who, in his mild-mannered way, tries to avert our gaze from the reality that we are seeing an ABC so under attack that this is probably an historic moment in terms of the level of assault that that great institution has undergone. I see here a former journalist in Mr Hinch. The sort of intimidation that is going on for journalists in this country under this current government is absolutely extraordinary. What we saw in the revelations of conversations, which led to Mr Milne having to resign as the chair of the ABC, was a man who confessed to, having been in a meeting with the minister and the Prime Minister, leaving with an impression that he should order the sacking of a journalist. The minister's come in here with a few words this morning, but what has he denied? Certainly he has not denied that he was in that room and in that meeting that led to Justin Milne acting with some integrity and finally withdrawing himself from the leading position on the board.

With the findings of the secretary's inquiries, we see that the senator merely restates what's already on the public record. That's all he's saying; he's repeating the platitudinous comments that we've seen from this government in response to the historic reality of an incredible level of interference with our national broadcaster. The minister and the former minister say they didn't directly seek the sacking of a journalist, but how can you not directly seek the sacking of a journalist yet leave such an impression on the chairman that he leaves with that impression? There are plenty of word games that get played around this place, and, whatever they said in that meeting, one thing was clear: when Justin Milne left it, he knew his job was to go and sack a rightly employed journalist who was just doing their job.

We know that in a document reported in TheDaily Telegraph on 26 September, Mr Milne called on Ms Guthrie on 15 June after a meeting with Mr Turnbull and the communications minister. He discussed the Probyn matter after this. Mr Probyn, you might recall, was accused of running Labor lies about the 'super Saturday' by-elections. In that phone call—it's reported that it lasted for approximately half an hour—Mr Milne berated me about Andrew Probyn, saying that the then Prime Minister hates him and, 'You have to shoot him.' That's the board document that was reported in TheDaily Telegraph. That's the kind of interference that this minister is seeking to say has not occurred, but the public record absolutely reveals that that is the case. The minister, in his response today, says that this matter should be entirely a matter for the board. The problem is that the board is so compromised by this minister's interference in it and by the Prime Minister's interference in it. It's a mess, and no amount of internal inquiry directed by this government, no matter how independent his department might attempt to be, can get to the bottom of the problems that beset the ABC on the watch of this government.

We know that it's not the case that the board has been able to operate independently on the watch of this government. This government have had their hands all over it—threats and actual cuts to funding, intimidation of the chair and interference in the delivery of people onto the board. It's just a litany of permanent attacks on the ABC. If those who are here in the gallery today could come to the communications estimates sessions, just for five minutes, they would see the members of this government line up and attack the ABC hour after hour. I'm sure that people across this country who have relied on the ABC and believe and trust the messages they have to say are outraged at the hypocrisy of the minister's comments today, his disrespectful way of coming in to describe a difficult few weeks for the ABC. It's a difficult few weeks for you, Minister, at the end of a period of time when you have been attacking the ABC nonstop. Your platitudes of continuing confidence in the ABC, allowing it independently to do its job, simply don't wash, not on the back of the changes that you have instituted.

Again, I say: Labor calls for a Senate inquiry to independently determine the involvement of this government. The ABC does not belong to the Liberal Party; it belongs to the Australian people. The Labor Party will always stand in defence of our great ABC. It's a vital institution in our democracy. This government should be ashamed of the way in which it has interfered.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek to take note of the minister's statement. What an absolutely laughable, if not tragic, display we've had from the minister today. It was an absolute whitewash of this issue, a pretence that the government had in no way involved themselves in these matters and that they're hands are clean of the absolute chaos that has been unfolding in the ABC and particularly on the ABC board.

When we saw Justin Milne resign as chair of the ABC board and his first interview in response to that, he well and truly belled the cat. He said, 'How on earth can we keep irritating the people who fund us?' That is the crux of the matter here. This government has continued to threaten the ABC with funding cuts, with reviews and with intimidation, and now we know that the Prime Minister was so irritated by particular journalists' stories and reporting that the chair of the ABC at the time resorted to calls to 'sack her' and 'shoot him', referring of course to Ms Alberici and to Mr Probyn. The Prime Minister said there was nothing to see here and that it had nothing to do with him. The Australian people can see right through that. We know that there is a problem with independence on the board of the ABC. It's been spelt out clearly by the former chairperson himself.

The Australian people deserve not only a public broadcaster that is funded properly to deliver the quality programs, news and stories that they've always relied on but their public broadcaster to be free of political interference. The ABC is owned by the Australian people, not by the government of the day. We know of course what this government would do with the ABC if they had their way, because their own national council passed a motion to privatise the public broadcaster. That's what they think of the ABC. Do you want to know what the Liberal Party really think about our public broadcaster? They want to sell it off. Cut its funding, criticise it, undermine its independence and then sell it off: that is this government's plan for our public broadcaster, and it is a disgrace. At a time when politics is viewed so poorly by the public—there's no need to guess why, when you look at the rabble on the government side and the absolute chaos that goes on on that side of the chamber—and at a time when the Australian people are desperate for quality journalism and news that they can rely on, they've always known that no matter what was going on they could rely on the ABC. Yet this government has actively engineered its undermining. They've stacked the board with their mates, they've cut funding and they've initiated reviews to further threaten the independence of the ABC. They still have before this place three pieces of legislation that are a direct attack on the ABC, its journalists and Australian audiences.

Minister Fifield can come in here and give a nicely worded statement about how all of this was going on and he had nothing to do with it. That is absolute bulldust. No-one buys it. The Prime Minister of the day wasn't happy and various ministers of the day weren't happy with stories and reporting coming out of the ABC, so what did they do? They called their mate on the board, who happened to be the chairperson, and said, 'Really not happy about this. What are you going to do about these journalists?' He fired off an email: 'Sack her; shoot him.' That is the disgraceful level of political interference that this government has exerted over our public broadcaster.

We also know that the competitive neutrality review and the three pieces of legislation currently before this place that are designed to cut the ABC off at the knees were introduced because of a deal with One Nation. Why does One Nation want to attack the ABC? The same reason the government does: they don't like journalists reporting facts, they don't like difficult questions coming from the media and they don't like stories that expose their hypocrisy. We know that immense pressure has been exerted on the ABC, because the chairperson himself belled the cat. He said that you can't keep irritating the person who funds you.

Let's get this political interference out of our public broadcasting, let's lock in funding and stop these political games and let's have a proper inquiry that looks at the facts. The government inquiry into itself is an absolute joke. I have a huge amount of respect for the secretary of the department of communications, but he has a job to do—that is, to deliver for the minister of the day—so I have absolutely no faith that the report that is being handed down today will deal with this issue in an honest and transparent way. We should establish a Senate inquiry, as others have said, and we should get that going as soon as possible. The main thing we need to do is restore faith in the ABC by making the board appointment process properly independent—no more PM's mates, thank you very much. We have to stop our public broadcaster from being used as a political pawn and its funding as a political weapon. The Australian people own their ABC. They deserve to know it's funded properly and is free of political interference. It is not owned by the government of the day and it is certainly not owned by the Liberal Party.

Let's be very clear: this government has been out to attack the ABC from the very first day they got into power. When Tony Abbott was Prime Minister he slashed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funding to the public broadcaster. This minister slashed millions of dollars from the public broadcaster in the last budget alone. They've introduced legislation to undermine the independence of our public broadcaster, they have set up reviews designed to cripple its delivery service, they have done deals with One Nation and Pauline Hanson to undermine the credibility of the ABC, and their own political party wants to privatise the whole thing. The Liberal Party cannot be trusted with our public broadcaster, with its funding, with board appointments and certainly not with any reviews. This government has proven time and again to be the ABC's worst enemy and the worst enemy of public interest journalism, independence and proper reporting.

Tim Storer (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The ABC is the nation's premier cultural institution and the prism through which we view ourselves, the nation and the world. It's the most trusted media organisation in the country. It is the taxpayers' broadcaster. Minister Fifield noted the troublesome last several weeks, and I would extend that certainly to this year in terms of the reports that have come out on the pressure being put on the ABC to take action with regard to journalists' reporting of the government and its activities. I share with many South Australians and Australians generally a deep concern regarding these reports, and we would welcome very much a Senate inquiry into these matters, as well as the reports of the other inquiries occurring both within the government and externally.

Certainly the events of the last several weeks and the comments made by ministers, the Prime Minister and Minister Fifield point very much to the urgency of the parliament to act to enhance the transparency and independence of the process of appointing ABC directors. This will have both a real and a perceived effect. This is why I certainly welcome that the minister has noted that the position of chairman and managing director would not be filled permanently unless new legislative arrangements are in place. That's my point of view. I would welcome that and seek that.

I will be looking to amend the ABC Act to provide more value and credibility of the independent nominations panel that will then be tasked with the appointment process for ABC board directors. It would provide more explanation by the government publicly and in good time if it intends to ignore the recommendations of that panel. The minister or, in the case of the chairman, the Prime Minister will be required to consult with the opposition regarding finalisation of appointment and, if they disagree, we would have a further Senate inquiry into this matter. These are not radical but modest proposed changes to the ABC Act that would provide far more credibility as to the recommendations of the independent nominations panel and the appointment of the ABC directors, which of course then choose the managing director.

I'm very much interested in exploring increasing parliamentary guarantees for future funding of both the ABC and SBS. They have been under considerable pressure and funding for the next triennium is always hanging over them. I would seek to have an independent public review every three years to align with the regular triennial funding.

These ideas are a multistage process to ensure the independence, transparency and integrity of the ABC, which is our pre-eminent cultural institution. This of course, as seen by many people in the comments in the last months and years, is of significant concern with regard to the public broadcasting role that it has. I look forward to further discussion and the support of other senators in regard to this.

Question agreed to.