[Peetwo]

Sandy in reply to Senator Sarah Henderson:

Via AP emails:

ABC Four Corners’ code breaches demand journalistic standards review not arrogant attack on media regulator

The attack by the ABC on Australia’s media regulator reeks of arrogance and self-entitlement, and is completely unacceptable. 

The finding by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) that the Four Corners program “Fox and the Big Lie” breached accuracy and fair and honest dealing requirements of the ABC Code of Practice is serious.

The finding warrants a comprehensive review by the ABC as to how journalistic standards at Four Corners, and across ABC news and current affairs programs more broadly, can be improved.

However, rather than learn the lessons of these code breaches, the ABC has improperly attacked the independent regulator demonstrating an untenable disregard for the need to comply with its own Code of Practice.

This response, in itself, brings the ABC into disrepute and builds the case for further legislative reform of the national broadcaster.

I call on Managing Director, David Anderson, to implement a full review of ABC journalistic standards in response to the ACMA’s adverse finding.  How can Australians have full trust in a public broadcaster which does not consistently acknowledge and remedy its failings?  I also raise concerns about the ABC’s failure to declare a potential conflict of interest between the author of its public statement on this matter and a Four Corners reporter.

I note with disappointment that Labor’s Communications Minister, Michelle Rowland, has declined to defend the important work of the ACMA, an independent Commonwealth statutory authority, which is responsible for regulating communications and media services in Australia.
22 December 2022


Media Contact
Kerry Ridgeway
0408 316 298
kerry.ridgeway@aph.gov.au

Sandy's reply:

Sarah,

That arrogance and self serving attitude is not confined to the ABC. 

Remember how Immigration threatened to deport Belle if I did not quit asking for the extra $2000 that I was forced to pay due the proven lie (tracking info) that they only received my papers several weeks later? 

They never paid up. 

Or CASA, I wrote to the CEO Pip Spence in June and, despite separate attempts, couldn’t get even an acknowledgement of receipt of correspondence until belatedly through Dan Tehan, after months, he got a nothing answer, signed by Pip Spence, but obviously written by a nothing underling with no grasp of the issues. 

Or the ATSB who cry poor and won’t investigate a mid-air collision that cost several lives. The same organisation that was audited by the Canadian Transportation Board in a peer review which resulted in a scathing and embarrassing expose’ of our now independent ATSB. 

Why? It’s obvious that the corporatisation of the arms of government, giving power to independent statutory bodies, is a denial of the Westminster principle of Ministerial responsibility. This is much to blame for the intolerable and costly transformation of the Public Service into the Public Sector. 

This Public Sector is increasingly in competition, unfair competition, with the Private sector. Unfair because of monopoly power. For example the independent corporate CASA has invented a plethora of unnecessary permissions for which it charges exorbitant fees. Such statutory authorities are supposed to follow a Minister’s Statement of Expectations. These Statements are merely weak and generalised suggestions with no force of law behind them. Thus they breed ill disguised contempt for any questioning, even from MPs. 

This diseased state of affairs is part and parcel of the Canberra machine, ‘Government Industries’ well and truly on its own trajectory and detracting from our prosperity, opportunities and strength as a Nation. 

Unless and until elected Parliamentary Representatives decide to reverse the trend, and take the democratic responsibility conferred by the voting public, then the bureaucracy will continue to rule for itself. Governance via Departments with responsible Ministers must be the principle means of administration. 

The naive notion that the arms of government can be hived off to government sponsored monopoly corporates who will govern with high efficiency at the lowest cost, at the same time mindful and concerned to follow the will of the voting public, is wishful thinking at best, denial of representative responsibility at worst. 

Sandy 
Both CASA and the ATSB are creatures of Labor Ministers, Gareth Evans the former, Anthony Albanese the latter.  

While on the subject of GI (Government industry) agencies that arrogantly ignore stakeholder and taxpayer concerns, I note the following Senator McDonald tabled correspondence to her from legal firm Emanate, representing landowners who are to be affected by the ARTC (Australian Rail Track Corporation) land buy up for the planned inland rail project: Ref - https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...letter.pdf

 

Attention: Senator Susan McDonald
Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC)
Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW)
Relevant Matter
ARTC: Emanate Landowners

Background
Emanate is retained on behalf of eighteen (18) Landowners (LO) along the North Star to Border
and Narrowmine to Narrabri projects, two (2) of the thirteen (13) projects which make up the
total ARTC: Inland Rail Project.

Each of (18) LO have been delivered “Opening Letters” over different dates ranging from
November 2021 to February 2022 which state an Offer will be delivered within the terms of the
Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) (Act).

To date:
1. No Offer in terms of Act has been delivered;
2. No clarity of a way forward has been delivered;
3. No substantive indication / timing of when LO may expect to receive an Offer has been
delivered;
4. No expert reports which identify any impacts of rail on Land as prepared by Inland Rail
experts, which consider detailed, final design of the railway or rail crossings so as LO is aware
of their interface with the railway line, or how LO will have to rearrange, redesign, and
redevelop their businesses after construction of rail, to be able to continue to operate around
a newly constructed railway system including crossings, have been delivered;
5. LO experts’ have provided Emanate with details as to the documentation and materials which
each require to enable them to properly predict / consider and detail the impacts of the
construction of the railway line and its associated infrastructure on Lands;
6. We have requested the reports in our emails, however, ARTC, as agent for TfNSW, have failed
to deliver any updated or current information / expert reports which relate to LO lands;
7. We have requested actual expert Flood Modelling, used by ARTC and TfNSW in their
assessment of the flood impacts upon the land, in excess of ten (10) occasions as detailed
hereafter at item ten (10) to item twenty (20);
8. ARTC and TfNSW refuse to deliver expert flood model, so as to enable LO retained hydrology
expert to complete his duties to the required standard, so as LO have an accurate idea of the
flood impacts which will definitely impact on their land as a direct and natural consequence of
the construction of the railway line, which is their right as a disposed Landowner;
9. ARTC have not delivered any agreement / confirmation of payment of LO legal, valuation,
hydrology and or other expert reports required to assist in assessing impacts on Land in
accord with Act.

Requests for Information

Emanate has written to ARTC and TfNSW through both their internal legal department, and
solicitors: Clayton Utz requesting delivery of expert reports / documents / material to the
assessment of impacts of Inland Rail project will have on LO lands, on the following dates:
10. Friday, 11 February 2022;
11. Tuesday 22 February 2022;
12. Wednesday 2 March 2022;
13. Thursday 3 March 2022;
14. Friday 19 March 2022;
15. Wednesday 13 April 2022;
16. Wednesday 20 April 2022;
17. Monday 16 May 2022;
18. Wednesday 8 June 2022;
19. Thursday 21 July 2022; and
20. Thursday 4 August 2022;
which detail, the following, which is required for LO retained experts to complete their duties as
retained:
21. ARTC Map identifying ARTC Rail updated construction batter locations on Land;
22. actual digital flood model prepared by ARTC engineers which has been used and relied upon
by ARTC and their consultants to predict flood behaviour or impacts of overland flow water, as
it impacts Land;
23. details of the ARTC detailed design for ARTC project area;
24. Specific reference to updated ARTC concept design for ARTC project in EIS; and
25. Specific PDF set of updated ARTC engineering drawings detailing and presenting the current
updated state of the rail track and batter design.

Despite our repeated requests for information, and despite Emanates best efforts, ARTC and
TfNSW continue to refuse access to updated, most recent and relevant documentation, directing
us to either the Inland Rail website, or provided expert reports /documentation which are not
current or up to date.

Further Issues
Further, ARTC have not in any way delivered to LO any clarity or information with regard to their
interface with the railway in the future, and in most instances, are denying LO crossings or access
to the land which they now freely traverse to run their businesses, this being despite Rail Safety
National Law (NSW) No 82a section 108 [5] which states parties must negotiate interface.
Inland Rail, have instead, decided where they will place crossings and the like, without any
consultation with the LO, and without any regard to how they run their businesses.

It follows, many of the LO which have retained Emanate have lost all faith in ARTC and TfNSW,
their continued lack of clarity, is ultimately, leading to an untenable position between all LO and
ARTC / TfNSW.

Summary
It is unacceptable, for a federal government owned corporation (ARTC) not to deliver expert
reports as they impact lands, or any information which relates to LO interface with the railway,
to LO, whose lives and businesses relate to relate Land, which is being taken, by a project which
has delivered no clarity as to if it will even be completed.

Going Forward
Would you please assist / investigate and or arrange conferences with the ARTC decision makers
to determine / agree a way forward.

We are available to confer / meet to enable discussions to proceed ASAP.

Future Action
Should you wish to discuss the foregoing please do not hesitate to contact Barry Taylor
.
Kind Regards,

 ...        

MTF...P2