Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 7:48:56 to 9:27:45
Discussion covers ABC's funding for children's content, regional broadcasting commitments, and controversial satirical programming. Officials defend the organization's charter obligations and address concerns regarding racial tensions and national identity representation.
Topics: First Nations, Social cohesion
Speakers: Hugh Marks, Hon Sarah Henderson, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, Gavin Fang, Varun Ghosh, Dean Smith, Melanie Kleyn, Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Nita Green, Sarah Hanson-Young
>> Thank you, Chair. Hi, Mr. Marks and team. Um, just wanted to know what the announcement of an additional 50 million means for the ABC that we announced at the end of last
>> No, thanks Senator. Um, it it comes at an important time I think. Um we have probably unlimited demand from content makers to access funding to make um you know a high range of really quality programs and obviously we've been limited in budget. We're finding at the same time that a number of other broadcasters are dropping out of the market particularly um in drama but of course we are now probably the only commissioner of um premium children's products >> in Australia. Um, and we're finding as well that the streamers are doing as in the international streamers are doing some content, but what I would say not with particular conviction. So, you know, being able to deliver um more Australian stories to Australians at this time um I think is is something that's very important. Um there's no shortage of material stories to tell um coming from some of the best producers um I would say globally um let alone in Australia. So, and that extra money also enables us to operate at a level uh that I think means we can compete more effectively with the quality of production that are being delivered by some of those international streamers. So, I think when we get our announcements um out hopefully within the next couple of weeks or at least within the next month, you'll see that the ambition level of the shows that have been enabled by the particular additional investment um I think is reflective of a higher ambition and a real sense of um purpose to deliver really excellent content um to to the audience. So, yeah, it's a critical time for the industry. Um the ABC we accept has a really important role um in both I guess obviously servicing the im the needs of the audience but also being a a key participant in a pretty important industry um at a time where it's um probably increasingly reliant on us as opposed to others to tell those stories. that additional funding um which amounts to you know about 16 I think 16 and 2/3 million a year um I think is very important in what it will enable
>> um and what does it mean for the content producers here in Australia do you have a sense of how that this money is going to be directed
>> yeah I think particularly for children's producers children's has become a very diff difficult category and I think there's been much enthusiasm from those children's producers um supporting um I guess of the The ABC is almost the sole commissioner of children's content in this market. Um, and they're very important stories to tell. So, um, being able to have more throughput into that sector will help support some of those industries to remain based and focused in Australia to tell Australian stories to not have to overly rely on the internationalization of their content in order to secure funding. So I guess on the Australianness side of it, um that's what it really enables. So um we've actually got a couple of really good kids shows ready to go. Um so um I'm really pleased with what what we're going to be able to deliver with that extra money.
>> And just on the topic of um the content you're creating for kids, uh what does that mean for Australian families?
Well, we know from our audience statistics that the ABC I think is you know um in terms of uh reach to children of Australia like we are we are uh light years ahead of every other broadcaster in the market. Um we know the streamers do have a lot of children's uh consumption but increasingly that's of American or British content. Um so in terms of the ability to access Australian stories with Australian accents and Australian narratives um Australian themes and values I think very important and it will mean that we can fill out that service that we provide to children in a way that parents can you know be very satisfied that you know there is more than Blueie and a couple of other shows that the volume of material that we can provide the environment that we can provide to to families for children will be something that's really competitive on a global landscape. So, um I think it's in the children's area where we must place the most focus and we will get the most return.
>> Interesting. There could be another bluey in the pipeline. We don't know.
>> As Senator Henderson would say, we only hope uh that we find another blueie that generates income as well for the ABC that will um enable us to reinvest even more in children's programming. I mean, we we might all laugh about it, but the reality is that being able to do more means our chances of coming across that next blueie and being able to create that funding that will further supplement into um the income base of the ABC and the taxpayer to do even more is something that we must focus on. We're doing some work at the moment just so that we understand as well um you know the return on incremental investment in the ABC in terms of the economic activity that comes from that and we know that there's a really positive ratio that comes from that economic activity um from investment in the ABC. So um hopefully through the year I'll be able to provide some more information on those outcomes.
>> That would be something we would love to hear more about that multiplier effect. Um, can you talk to us a little bit about what 5-year funding means for the
>> Yes, Senator. I mean, I think anything that we're looking at now from a scripted perspective or from a children's perspective, we're already looking at 2027 2028 broadcast. >> Um, so, uh, and possibly even into 29 if it came to adult drama production as an example. So having the certainty of understanding and these are these are big ticket items that really move the dial in terms of our budgeting. So having the certainty to understand that we can continue to invest in those premium stories because we're taking producers along a development pathway and the reliance that the end product's going to be able to be commissioned I think is really important not just for the ABC but for the whole industry. So these things don't happen you know like I can't click my fingers and change the schedule in any year. It really takes 3 to four years for that momentum to start to play. So longerterm funding certainty I think and gives the greater ability to be able to invest with confidence not just for the ABC but for the whole industry.
>> Fantastic. Um and just with respect to news content um accurate and reliable news is more important than ever. How has the ABC maintained trust with the Australian um public in that?
>> Yeah, I think it's a it's a constant exercise. Um you know, we can always and we should always strive to be better. Um you know, Mr. Fang and I talk constantly about, you know, the things that we need to focus on as an organization to continue to drive, you know, better outcomes from across the organization. You know, one of the big projects that we're working on at the moment is the use of language. The use of language is a very important factor in in accuracy and accurately describing um the particular things that happen or don't happen um as part of news reporting. Um I think when we talk about um impartiality, you know, one of the things that can be quite difficult as well in a news organization is when you're always reporting the news >> and at the moment the news can be quite heavy. >> And it can be quite global. So being able to do new programs like national forum which enables us to really focus on a domestic sort of discussion of ideas and not be overly impacted by the having to report news of global events. I think it well enables us to sort of balance that coverage in a way that I think I've been talking about for some time as being wanting to do more of. So being able to be that you know town square effect rather than sort of the news reporting effect. Getting that balance right between the two is also something that's very important. I don't know if you want to add anything to that, Mr. Fang.
>> Oh, no. I think you've summed summed up there. I mean, I think um uh you know, the audience responds uh and tells us how they feel. Uh our trust scores, I think MD were at 79% or 81% of Australians suggested they trusted the ABC. So, I think, you know, >> um you know, those are numbers that suggest to us that, you know, what we're doing is being effective.
>> Yeah. How often do you do you do that
the survey um of a panel um I think bimonthly or it might be monthly, I'm not sure, but it's something that we're constantly surveying and and you know, it will be no surprise to you that when um there are events sometimes where the ABC doesn't perform as well, those trust scores do drop. So, it is responsive to what's happening in the environment. >> Um but, you know, I've worked in various organizations um around the country. Anyone getting more than 75% as a trust score is pretty much unheard of. So I think um there is recognition of the value of the ABC. Having said that there is constant we get constant feedback as we should about you know all sorts of matters that we can do better and we would be the first to recognize that being better is something that we should always be striving to be.
>> Um and with one more really quick um with a third of Australians living in uh regional communities um how does the ABC
the largest uh workforce um in rural and regional Australia. Um it's a very important part of the ABC. Um mainly that's through audio of course in terms of a local market delivery. Our television tends to be more national services or news maybe more statebased services. Um it is something that you know I think we could do more of. Um it is certainly something that is a big part of my focus. Um and in an area where we're seeing just by the um realities of commerciality, many of the commercial media players doing less in rural and regional Australia. It's an important part of um our responsibility. I think some of the programs that we've delivered over time. Um Master Dogs, Backros, you know, some of these shows we might not regard as as being rural and regional. Um but they do feature the wonderful stories of those places and characters that we find in those locations. And in terms of news and current affairs, it's also something that I've been asking our team to do more of so that we see more of rural and regional Australia in the metropolitan areas as well. I think that's another, you know, where we get that information. We have a big project ongoing this year which is about localization and what I'm what we're endeavoring to to ascertain is whether we can take the content that we create in local markets often for audio and whether we can by use of technology ensure that that content could be available on multiple platforms. So, if you're consuming ABC News Digital in central west of um New South Wales or Central Victoria, you'll be able to elect to receive a local version of the News Digital website that is specific to your area and be able to preference basically local stories and we can get more content by using the content that we have, the people we have and the technology we have available to us now to be able to do that. So, that's a big push for this year. um that is sort of prominence of localization. So that's something I hope we get going um in the middle of the year and towards and further on. We've also had some discussions with services like AAP. Um we sort of announced that we were going to make our emergency content in particular available to um other local media providers. We saw in the case of the bushfires for example in central Victoria that there were a couple of local providers that opted in to take that content available to their audiences which I think is another great value ad. Um we imagine that a service like AAP may be able to help us um leverage that at scale um so that you know anyone that is on the AAP wire is able to access ABC material. So again it's another focus for the year making sure that um the content that we generate doesn't just have to go through ABC channels it can be available particularly in news deserts or other areas where you know more services I think and more content would be of value to local communities. So those are two big focuses for the year.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I am at this point available able rather with the um cooperation of my colleagues to release the officials from Australia Post. So, thank you for your attendance here and the work that goes into it.
>> Senator, I thought that was going to be
>> No, no, Mr. Marks. I think I think there are some there is great interest there is great interest in your work, Mr. Marks. So, I think we will continue for a little while longer. Um, Senator
>> Chair, thank you very much. Um, Mr. Fang, I've raised concerns about ensuring that there's no activism in the ABC. I think it is a continuing issue and I particularly raised concerns about the withdrawal of four ABC staff from the Adelaide Writers Festival. it's been reported that you wrote to one person where you deny that this was this constituted a boycott. Uh, I would put to you that the withdrawal of Sarah Ferguson, John Lions, Laura Tingle, and Louise Milligan does constitute support of the boycott in support of Dr. Randa Abdel Fatar uh who has made some incredibly disparaging and hateful comments about Israel and about Jewish So can I ask you to explain your position because in the in the case of Mr. lines and Miss Tingle, you say there's no evidence of this claim that they support the boycott, but they walked out. They they walked out of this at the Adelaide Writers Festival. Surely that is evidence in itself of activism such that it reflects on the reputation of the ABC.
>> Oh, thank you um for the question, Senator, because it's good to be able to clarify these matters. Um I did not write back to one particular person. I provided a response to uh a group of letters that were very similar in nature and suggested that they had been you know part of a a campaign which is fine. I'm happy to respond to the audience. Uh what those letters suggested was that there was a clear reason for those ABC staff withdrawing from the Adelaide Writers Festival. And my point to those people was that at that point there had been no comment made by uh some of those particular ABC staff and it was not fair to infer any reason or any motivation for why they had withdrawn. I don't think it is fair to suggest that a no comment can be inferred as somebody's motivation. And so that was the the point of the letter uh which I wrote back to those people. Well, I'm
referring to one letter written to one person. I'm not going to identify this Uh I don't have this person's permission, but this person is known to you. And that's not the case. You're mischaracterizing your letter because you state very clearly, you assert that John Lines and Laura Tingle chose to withdraw from the Adelaide Writers Week in support of Dr. Randa Abdel Fetar. You provide no evidence of this claim. At no stage, neither Mr. Lines nor Miss Tingle made any such suggestion. In his only public statement, and Mr. Lines did make a public statement, he referred to the controversy surrounding the event and said he would be withdrawing. And Miss Tingle correctly, as you say, made no public comment. I would put to you that when you allow your reporters and your staff to be involved in these sorts of events and then when they withdraw and join a boycott, that that is conduct equivalent to activism in support of someone who has made the most hateful and horrendous comments about Jewish people, who has encouraged children to chant into father, who has implicitly celebrated the Hamas terrorist attack. uh who in my view based on some of the terrible comments that she has made which is why she was uh cancelled initially uh she has really made I think what amounts to some anti-semitic comments and yet you've got Mr. Lines, Ms. Tingle, Ms. Milligan and Ms. Ferguson all withdrawing. So I put to you that their action in withdrawing from the festival constituted a boycott and all we needed to see was their action, not their
>> Um well Senator, um I think that what I just outlined to you then accurately reflected the letter which has been published in the newspapers and which you've read out. So people can can see that I I I uh unfortunately I disagree that somebody not commenting or somebody making a comment on social media where they've said they are withdrawing uh indicates that they have taken a position supporting the comments of Dr. Randa Abdul Fata. I I just simply do not think that that inference is accurate.
>> Well, Mr. Fang, that doesn't stand to reason because suddenly there was a and suddenly many participants in Adelaide in the Adelaide Writers Week started withdrawing and they joined the boycott. So how can you say with any credibility that there's no evidence to suggest that they support Dr. Randa Abdel Fetar? >> They joined the boycott. Mr. Fang
>> Senator they choose to withdraw choose to withdraw from the festival and they did not provide a reason that supported Dr. Randa Abdel Fata.
>> Well Mr. Lines did Mr. line spoke about the controversy and he withdrew and then uh Miss Ferguson has posted on Twitter and she's actually made some comments which very clearly make clear she was supporting Louise Adler and her cause and Miss Milligan and I'm happy to table these posts. Miss Milligan made even stronger comments and I assume Miss Milligan's still working for Four
>> She still works for the ABC.
>> For the ABC, right? Not for Four
>> Um, she still pro works at times for Four Corners. Yes, she still works for
Four Corners. >> Right. So, she said, "This woman is one of my dear the dearest friends I have. Principles of steel, heart of a lion, a woman who goes out on a limb. My dear, dear other Louise, my publisher, my friend, my fellow nata on the phone, a true public intellectual. No one will fight in your corner like this woman. Strengthe your arm. Now, Louise Adler in stepping down, uh, she led the boycott. So, you've now got ABC journalists participating in the boycott. And what I'm what I'm particularly concerned about is that you are pretending >> that you are pretending, Mr. Fang, that there was no evidence to suggest that they were supporting ABC employees were supporting Dr. Randa Abdel Fetar.
>> Senator, I responded to audience complaints about a particular aspect. I didn't make any other claims or any other inferences other than they had not commented and that it was not um fair to infer any motivation. Uh Louise Milligan's comments stand for themselves on social media. She was supporting her friend Louise Adler. As you well know, there was a significant amount of controversy.
>> She also joined the boycott. She was due to appear and she joined the boycott.
>> She chose not to continue to participate in the in the writers.
>> She joined the boycott, Mr. thing
>> and she made her position.
>> Only people are allowed to not participate in something. Not allowed to have friends, not allowed to
>> Senator, Senator Hanson Young, I will come I will come to you. Senator Senator Hanson Young, I will come to you at the conclusion of Senator Henderson's
>> Um, so Senator, as you know, there was a high degree of contention around the writer's week. many people outside of the ABC withdrew. Louise Milligan uh is on the record and suggesting that she was supporting her friend Louise Adler.
Um >> I have friends,
>> but other ABC reporters who were there uh for external work have not made a comment that says they're supporting the comments of Dr. Randa Abdel Fata.
>> Well, they weren't withdrawing because their grandmother was sick. They were withdrawing because they were joining the boycott in support of Dr. Randa Abdel Fata. And while others may choose to do so, in the case of ABC staffed where there are very strong obligations of impartiality, I would put to you that they were not demonstrating impartiality in relation to their conduct. I mean, the ABC must insist on the very highest standards of conduct when it comes to ABC journalists. You can't allow your journalists to run their own political activism because it reflects on the it
want to participate in.
>> Reflects on the ABC.
>> Senator, I agree. We need to hold ourselves in particular our news staff to the standards of impartiality that we're obligated to. Um, in this particular case, those reporters have not provided in those public statements any motivation for why they choose to withdraw. And and so it's not it's not possible to infer just from their public statements. And that's what I was responding to for the letter writer about why they withdrew.
>> Well, that that is just wrong. Factually wrong. Of course, it's possible because they joined the boycott. As I say, they didn't decide not to participate suddenly because their grandmother was sick. And I I looked particularly what Sarah Ferguson put on Twitter on January the 12th, 141,000 views. Returning to Sydney today on Adelaide, withdrawing from festival role as interlocator, AWW and Louise Adler created a place where debate flourished with respectful conversation, including on our most difficult subjects that should be defended in our cultural life. Now, come >> I mean the problem I have is that unlike journalists from other media organizations except for the SBS, there are very very important obligations on ABC staff to be impartial. And when you have got ABC journalists participating in a boycott in support of someone who has celebrated implicitly the Hamas terrorist attack, who has encouraged children to chant inifada, who has demonized Jewish people, I would say that's completely inappropriate and that Mr. Marks, I turn to you. That's not on >> on your watch, you should not be permitting this sort of activism in the ABC. I would put to you,
>> Senator. Even the comment you read from Sarah Ferguson, which I've only just heard from you, talks to me more about the politicization of the event. It certainly doesn't say anything about the particular author that you've been discussing or the support for that author. It talks about the politicization of the event. So surely principles of freedom of speech, interference, political interference in creative debate, these are principles that journalists are entitled to stand up for. So it doesn't and m to just to support what Mr. Fang says, >> that in no way means that they're in support or making any statement implicitly or otherwise.
>> Well, I think that's just
>> what their words say.
>> It's nonsensical. Mr.
>> G one minute warning. >> Um move the call on and we'll come back.
>> I think in many cases, Senator, the matters were taken out of their hands. Like if someone's there to interview a a a person who's no longer at the conference, what point do they have in continuing to turn up? It was just a
happy coincidence, was it? That they are
>> I think each each individual will have their own reasons. But I think the the message or the Twitter comment that you read out from Sarah Ferguson talks quite aptly to what I think would be going through a lot of their minds, which is what happened to a creative event that was about the free expression of ideas and discussion. something that we talk about often as wanting to promote um in society that was politicized to a degree that that was um closed off to a degree that people felt that was an inappropriate um um thing to happen. And so I don't think that by implication that means that they're supporting of comments or posts or other things made by the the particular um person author that you refer to.
>> So why did they withdraw then Mr. Marks?
I think there would be a variety of reasons senator for each one. So
>> sick sick grandmother
>> I don't think sick grandmother was one of them.
>> Lost their voice uh got a bit shy on you know a bit of stage fright. I mean for goodness sake
>> one would be
>> there's only one credible reason why they withdrew and that's because they were joining the boycott in support of Randa Abdel Fetar.
>> Some of them were supporting the right to freedom of expression which is something apparently the Liberal Party is meant to stand for.
>> Hold on. Well, well, that's an appropriate juncture, I think. Um, thank you, Senator Henderson. We'll come back to you. Um, Senator Hanson Young.
>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Marks. Um the ABC is being given an extra $50 million as a result of um the Green's negotiation with the government um at the end of last year specifically for um the creation of of local content um and uh um children's content. Keen to know where you're up to with the discussions in the government on that and and what's going to be done with that money.
Um yeah I think um Senator where we are discussions I think we have clarity around now Miss Klein just to give you an opportunity um in terms of the profile of that particular funding over the next three years.
>> Yes. Uh Mr. Marks we've got clarity that we will receive that money in equal installments over the next three years. So $16.7 million or thereabouts.
>> Yeah. We had a number of ideas that had been pitched into the organization which we were unable to proceed with in the absence of the additional funding. Um I'm hoping that within as I said the next couple of weeks or the next month at least that we're in a position to make announcements um about a number of children's programs and adult dramas that we're ready to proceed with and get into production.
>> Okay, great. Um
>> including one in South Australia
Senator. >> Okay, looking forward to that. Can you
I'm it's you know announcements Senator are difficult but it'll be if I could drop some breadcrumbs a um a well-known brand coming back to life uh for the benefit of children to be produced by a company in Adelaide um for the ABC. >> I'm not sure Senate estimates are the best place for program.
>> Fair enough. When when do we expect to have some have uh some announcements about that?
>> Senator, I'll be in Adelaide uh early next week. Um and I expect that particular program will announce it uh next week.
>> Okay, great.
>> all Western Australian. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, it's it it is important and we do recognize the need to support um productions and producers um outside, you know, the two big states, New South Wales and Victoria, who get a disproportional >> uh share of uh of I guess premium television production. So, we're also always very conscious of >> of supporting companies in other
>> Um obviously the ABC had a good night at the actors uh last week. Um uh I just want to one of the awards of course went to play school um and which is a you know a favorite of most of us I think 60 years this year.
>> It's three months older than me senator
>> and I don't know who's looking better Ted or you Um uh I do want to ask however there is this federal court case in relation to um play school. and I I think this is in relation to casual staff and then transferring to
>> it's in relation to contract staff and um it's you know it's a well-known practice in the film and television sector that programs are ordered in seasons and staff I guess go with the season of a particular show and that you know the contract relates to that season. New legislation was introduced that requires corporations like ourselves if um someone had been on I think the second contract to then offer that person full-time employment. Um we found on review that we hadn't done that with a number of individuals including the one at play school that you you raised. when that was raised with us, we instantly said we would translate that person to a full-time role in accordance with the law. And we've done that with a number of other people. Um uh and um so, you know, we would like there not to be litigation because we have we instantly accepted that we had to make that um that transfer to a full-time role, which
>> So, how has that ended up in the court
then? Well, I think the the union, I think, is still insisting that we be penalized for not having done it earlier. So, they're um they're pushing ahead with taking action against the ABC to seek a penalty for the um for for not having done that in compliance with that particular new law that was recently introduced.
>> Okay. And how much has this cost the ABC
>> I'm not I'm not sure, Senator, but we can take that on notice.
>> Okay. Um, and how many employees does
>> I think Senator, I'd have I'd have to give you a range. Um, about I think 10% of our staff. Um, so you know, our workforce is around about 4,400. Yeah. >> So about 10% of our staff at any time are on contract. Mhm. >> Um obviously many of those are on contract. Some of them might be maternity leave fills or whatever which is appropriate. So we think about half of that number probably were in this range of being on a project contract rather than full-time contract. So it doesn't affect a significant number of staff in the organization. But there were I think something in the order of about a couple of hundred people that were transferred to full-time contracts.
>> Okay. Um, and how so how do you I mean I I get the idea that when you're shooting season by season um that that's different to just having a full-time, you know, journalist up in the press gallery or somebody on, you know, um in the editing suite or someone in admin. Um so going forward, how are you going to manage that? Because it won't just be in relation to play school. I guess it'll be there'll be there's various different um people that are brought on for seasonal work.
>> Yeah. No, there are there are many of these shows like Play School, you know, I think the argument would be it pretty much continues production even though it says season to season. >> Um so we should be able to manage that for those more full-time shows with you know appropriate leave provisions etc. Yeah. >> In the relevant times and discussion with staff. So, I think most of the shows that it applies to are pretty much on a full-time production schedule. Um, where there are shows that may be more intermittent, um, hopefully we can continue just to manage it in a different way by consultation directly with the staff member impacted about whether it is a full-time role or not. I see. >> But what I wouldn't want to see is obviously people sometimes lose roles because we don't necessarily have a role for them on a full-time basis. But yes, >> so it is an area we will just need to continue to be proactive on.
>> can I ask about the um commitment made by the government uh the last election um to kind of reinstate our engagement with the Pacific and the role of the ABC uh in that. Where is the where are those conversations up to? Um and you know I know what the government committed was nowhere near the budget that had been cut from Tony Abbott's
>> No, I think um we're we are still awaiting final formal decision on the renewal of the funding which I think um runs out I'm not sure Miss Klein but
>> this financial year
>> um
>> so June 30 June uh June 30 for the bulk of the funding. So there is uh a smaller amount of funding that is more specific to transmission that's ongoing which is approximately I think $1.3 million something in that order on an ongoing basis but the bulk of the funding which is around $8 million peranom that runs out at the end of this financial year.
Um, in positive news, we're also, just to make an announcement, we're also, I think, going to make available or we're going to be able to change our DAB spectrum to make available the Pacific service uh, for the benefit of Pacific communities in Australia as well um, in the near future. So, we're taking advantage of what's an excellent service also to engage with, you know, Pacific communities who are in our um, who living in Australia as well. So, that's an addition to what we're going to be able to do.
>> Okay. And has there been any is there any money coming to you from Department of Foreign Affairs in relation to this given the obvious self- diplomacy and security element of it all?
Uh so yes and sorry I don't have the specifics in front of me but we certainly do have uh what we would characterize more as grant funding that comes from the Department of Foreign Affairs. Yeah. So this particular $8 million uh sorry appreciate I'm stating the obvious was rolled into our appropriation funding. >> Um but then we do separate to that yes still receive certain certain grant grant funding for very specific outcomes.
>> thank you Senator Hanson Young Senator Na Jim Price.
>> Uh thank you chair. Um and thank you all for being here again today. Um, I would like to begin by asking I've got some questions with regard to the uh program always was tonight with Tony Armstrong. Um, firstly, Mr. Marks and Mr. Fang, if you could provide a yes or no response for each of the following questions, I'd appreciate that. Um firstly, would you agree that our nation has an indigenous heritage, a British foundation, and an immigrant
>> Um, do you mind just repeating that question? Sorry, Senator.
>> Uh, would you agree that our nation has an indigenous heritage, a British foundation, and an immigrant character?
>> Senator, sorry. What's is this in relation to program consideration or about something the ABC's done, or you just seeking my personal opinion? I'm
I'm asking I suppose your opinions if you don't want to provide your own opinions and then the ABC does I mean you are the broadcaster for the nation so I'm trying to get a feel for how the ABC I suppose views our country so it I mean it's a simple yes or no it's not a complex question >> and excuse me but I didn't interject to any of your questions so if you could use that clearly you don't have I would appreciate that thank you I'll take >> I'll take I'll take direction from the chair process process you didn't
senators that's what you senators um I appreciate that point yes Senator Hanson Young if you're raising a point of order if you'll just begin with that phrase then that way
>> I'm raising a point of order you can't ask officials for opinions
>> I mean Senator is the charter is pretty clear our charter
>> talk hold sorry no a point of order has been raised I I think I think the way to deal with this is to permit Mr. Marks and Mr. Fang to respond to the question as they see fit. Um whether it be in their personal capacity, if they don't want to offer an opinion, then that's understandable. If they want to offer a view from the ABC, they're capable, I think, of dealing with this question. If you need further assistance from me, then um then I will then I will interject once more.
>> Just point of order, chair, just respond. Sure. I don't believe there is any basis for the point of order because the prohibition on providing or being asked opinions relates only to officials uh who essentially public servants and so Mr. Marks and colleagues don't fit that description.
>> Well, so I just want to just clarify the position. I don't I don't want to rule on that because I I'm not sure whether it's it it's either advisable or appropriate for people who hold an office within a public authority like the Australian Broadcasting Corporation um to give their personal opinions or or to be forced to give their personal opinions. But um given the position that I'd reached just before um that point was raised, I think um a question's been put. I'll give the officials a chance to answer or the officials of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation a chance to answer and then if we need to resolve any further issues, we can take them up at that time.
>> And just just for the benefit of this committee, the asking for opinions is set out in Lodge's page 568 refers only to offices of departments.
>> Thank you, Senator Henderson.
>> Uh, thanks S. Our charter um requires us to reflect the broad diversity of Australia. I'm sure many of the elements you referred to are part of that broad diversity of Australia. Um,
>> so that's a yes, I suppose.
>> Well, it is a broad we are a broad
>> So would you say our nation is better off thanks to British settlement?
I don't think you really I don't think that's an appropriate matter for me to to offer an opinion on, Senator. I mean, um, that's a that's an opinion matter.
>> It's difficult. I know. All right. Um, question. Uh, my next question, the historical record is clear that British colonization did result in Aboriginal people being killed in large numbers. from diseases to which they had no immunity from violence on the frontier and from also uh internal tribal conflict. Um but I suppose as many historians have noted like Jeffrey Blay uh Jeff Bolton, Nigel Bigger, the term genocide is not an accurate word because it's not supported in evidence. So Mr. remarks. Is it the ABC leadership's view that in colonial Australia genocide was committed against Aboriginal people? That is the definitional sense, the deliberate and systematic killing of Aboriginal people with an intent to bring about their destruction in whole or in part.
>> Again, Senator, my role here is not to provide opinions. Our role is to produce content or create content and and um and make that available to the audiences and to ensure that content meets editorial standards and appropriate accuracy and impartiality. Um obviously in various forms of content that can be differently interpreted. In this case it was a satirical comedy program. Um now to the extent that any factual assertions were made in that program um or any assertions were made as to facts um I think the if I remember the program uh those facts were referred to as people some commentators said or some historians said there was no definitive fact alleged or asserted and um as a result I think that meets with editorial
>> Okay. So I suppose ABC um supports um that concept. I I I would suggest I mean it certainly appears that way and the average Australian in my view would see it that way. So
>> I don't believe that's what I said, Senator.
>> And I'm asking this question because Always was Tonight host Tony Armstrong asserted genocide as fact. He did. And this is what he said. He said, "By the way, did you know that no member of the first fleet was recorded as having been infected by smallpox? Makes you wonder how did the locals get infected by it in the first place? Unless, as some experts have argued, it was deliberately introduced to decimate a population who colonists have described as primitive and barbaric, which would have been a deliberate use of biological warfare leading to a genocide. the ABC is defending the Always Was Tonight program as satire, as you've sat here and suggested. But let me remind you of something else that Mr. Armstrong said during the show. And to be honest, I don't know how it's even supposed to be comedy. Um, Mr. Armstrong said, "We want always was tonight not just to entertain uh and sometimes not even entertain, but also inform and ask the hard-hitting questions." So, this program pedled falsehood of genocide and a while deliberate distortion of historical events. Can you explain to me how that's actually satire?
Uh, Senator, looking at the program as a whole, um, obviously there are important issues that, um, many members of the indigenous community um, feel strongly about. The program was a reflection of many of those issues in a satirical context. Um, where there were, as you say, assertions, what you would alleges assertion of faction material, I would say, was presented um, as a a hypothesis in a satirical context. Um and the program has now been we had some complaints. The program has been through a review by the OMBbudsman who found that the program did not um breach editorial standards. Um and I think we can take comfort both from from the finding of the ombbudsman and if you watch the show itself I think it raises many important issues for indigenous Australians that was important for the ABC to air
>> except you don't provide any other context to the contrary from indigenous Australians do you
>> well I would senator there are many
>> provide a list of those articles and those contexts that are contrary to such views as what was presented on this program through the ABC.
>> Um, Senator, I'm not aware of programs done by the ABC that talk to um the historical nature of uh of the events that you're talking about. Um, but there is there's many indigenous uh content issues that we feature on on a weekly monthly basis across the organization. um that uh I think provides a bunch of much information about the issues that are faced by indigenous Australians
>> except are you saying that there is uh there are views contrary to the specific views that have been raised by Mr. Armstrong a sense of appreciation for this country and our history and a view of our history in the round. Um that doesn't suggest that indigenous Australians are victims of colonization and white people in this country a and that doesn't demonize white Australians through racial racial prejudice. Are there can you specifically point to anything any of your programs that actually does that?
Senator are happy for us to go away and provide uh what we reasonably can provide a list of that. But I I suppose in a general sense there are uh a myriad of um times across the ABC and across its output where we have done stories that um examine uh all types of uh issues as it relates to indigenous Australians. uh success stories, uh stories of other um se stories that celebrate uh the contribution of indigenous Australians to Australia, stories that explore their lives. Uh this is something that we are consistently doing
>> um in the context of race relations, right? Like we're we're right now our country is so divided and how does this program actually help in terms of race relations in our country? I mean, who made the editorial decision to allow this program to air that clearly intended to demonize British settlement and pedal in falsehoods?
>> I said it was a program commissioned by the indigenous unit in the screen sector of of uh of the ABC. Um I think the program raised important issues for indigenous Australians. I think it did that in a satirical context. Yes, it's a one hour one half hour program in isolation. Um but I think in all of the various things that you refer to things that you say were asserted as facts are introduced as people may have said or it has been alleged. Um I think any audience member watching the program would understand the nuance of that. Um so you know and again I'd point to the ombbudsman having reviewed the program and not found any breach of editorial
standards. So, here are some of the examples of the content that appeared on the news ticker on always was tonight. And I've tabled these, so there should be coming to you copies. But the first one stickler historian wants you to remember Arthur Phillip was also a cun n second fleet also ABC announces more manageable series stuff the British didn't steal. Later in the program Mr. Armstrong interviewed the Rainbow Serpent who said like how can anyone support colonization? Mr. Armstrong replied, "Well, it beats me." So, in your National Press Club address, you said that the ABC's role is to protect and promote our national identity. Are these just hollow words given that the content on Always Was Tonight on the news ticker was clearly intended to vilify British settlement? I mean, I'm personally uh offended. Uh, my great great great grandmother was brought here as a as an orphan through the Irish potato famine, but she's white, so she's less valued by the ABC. Um, you know, like the there's no nuance in any of this. This is just vilification of our history and of those of us with heritage that relates to those who were brought here under circumstances against their own will in many ways. I mean, we're supposed to sit here and venerate Aboriginal people and our history, but we're told to hate the rest of our history. and you as you the broadcaster are paid taxpayers dollars and this is the disrespect you come up with and you call it satire. I mean are these just hollow words that you provided at the National Press Club address?
>> Not at all, Senator. Um they're really important words and they're important words that we intend to govern um in our roles in the organization going forward. there are a number of programs that we're working on today uh that would talk to exactly the things that you would say we would want to achieve on across the organization. So um this particular program I think you know it was part of a multitude of programs that the ABC presented over the Australia Day period. Um we had always was tonight we had the Australian the year awards we had the Australia Day concert. Um I think there was plenty of celebration of Australia and Australian values across that period and this was an opportunity for um I guess to present issues of importance to um a part of the community that has many of whom have feelings about the particular part of Australia Day and the celebration that it's important for us to be aware of if we don't air and discuss these issues as difficult as they might be to talk about and as uncomfortable and um I guess as many people might find them not tasteful. Um it is still a appropriate part for a creative organization to be able to explore these these ideas. So um Senator we we of course have to provide a range of content across the year across our organization across the years. Many of these shows take times take time to create. Um the show in question always was tonight. Yes, many people will find this tasteful. it may confront um but it's there are many important issues that were needed to be added.
>> So
>> um Senator Rice, can I >> if if you're going to continue one more question and then I'll share the call and we can come back to you.
>> Can I just also clarify?
>> Well, no, sorry. >> I know just we've got one more question in this block. So we'll come back.
>> So do you then endorse Tony Armstrong's desire to give the colony a colonoscopy?
>> I'm not sure if I'm not sure what you're I'm not sure what you're asking me. So,
>> med school.
>> Well, you're obviously endorsing those.
>> No, Senator, you can't take that conclusion from my statement.
>> Perhaps it's the ABC that needs one.
>> Um, Senator, um there was a multitude of programming that we provided over the Australia Day period. Many it was excellent. I don't know if you tuned in to the Australian of the Year Awards.
>> Don't really tune into the ABC.
>> They were inspirational. >> Um I think the Australian Day concert was great. Um there was there are many other programs that we did as well. Um I think as an organization we cannot be accused in any way of not um recognizing the importance of that event. But in recognizing the importance of event, it is also important that we recognize it has an impact on a section of the community that you know we need to be able to
>> agree. It has an impact on race relations in this country as well and we're at a heightened state right now. And the ABC should be doing its best as publicly funded broadcaster to ensure that you don't heighten those race relations in this country or teach our children that white kids should see themselves as colonizers who need to be demonized and that black kids are victims. Like seriously. And you know what? My my stepson is a white kid in this country and he feels it. and he feels like his brothers who he shouldn't have to see a difference with are treated differently. In fact, my my sons that I gave birth do feel like they're treated differently and they don't feel like the broadcaster because I'm told quite often by young people in this country actually serves to allow them to feel proud to be Australian in this country. I I've got other questions that I need to come back to.
So, I've got some questions in relation to ABC radio in Perth. Um, I understand that there's going to be or there has been a move from the change of frequency from ABC radio in Perth from AM frequency to FM frequency. Um, and I just want to understand what prompted that change. What was the
Um, Senator, there are a few things that are Perth specific um that uh have over time really impacted the quality of the AM services in Perth. Um, sandy soil, um, transport infrastructure, as you know, AM is transmitted best from swampy ground, which is not a common element of the Perth landscape. Um so it was actually an amazing opportunity for us to be able to um make the shift to FM to be able to improve the quality of those services for residents in the Perth area and surrounds. No one will lose coverage as a result of that. They will have to retune their ABC services to the FM dial, but that what they'll find when they get there is a significantly improved quality of service. We will do it in a way that ensures there is no break in emergency services broadcasting um coverage. Um there will actually be a simolcast period between uh the AM and FM services. Um but Perth residents and surrounds will find themselves with
>> You've referred to improvements in quality. Uh will it allow more people to listen to ABC services?
Um uh it FM is a strange beast compared to AM. Um FM generally has a lower uh sorry a narrower reach than FM um than AM sorry. But um I think the way that the planning has has happened uh will mean that you know most of the people covered by the current services will now receive the FM service. There may be some small areas where uh audience members will have to tune in to a different ABC service, but in totality, everyone will be covered. And I might just add, Senator, one of the benefits of the um AM to FM switch will be uh an efficiency outcome. It will be less expensive for the ABC to provide those transmission services. Um so that's a saving that we'll be able to secure which will enable us to invest in
other content. And what steps have you taken to make Western Australia and particularly Perth listeners um to the ABC aware of those changes?
>> Um Senator, I'll be in Perth, I think the week after next, as part of the start of communications to um the audience and the community um about the changes. So there is a comprehensive plan in place um that hopefully will reach all uh affected people in a way where um no one should be surprised as to either the switch or the timing.
>> Wonderful. And look forward to seeing you in Perth. M
>> higher quality Perth services. Yeah.
>> On the same issue, if I may, what impact or what impact, if any, is there to community broadcasters?
Um the community broadcasters, my understanding is have been um repointed to a different um spectrum or frequency that will mean that those services are still available to all relevant um uh listeners of those services. Um so all of the different shifts have been accommodated in the in the shift in the license plan.
>> So Calamanda Community Broadcast has been consulted with they're fully aware and they're fully on board. My that's my
understanding senator
>> in the Perth Hills. Senator Green >> private joke. Um so Calamanda Community Radio fully aware fully on board uh and um no stakeholder issues.
>> That's my understanding Senator. >> I'm sure they would prefer not to have had any change but the benefits of the change overall I think um outweigh that that inconvenience.
to change t slightly once more. Um, I'd
>> He was talking about this is not my
chance to start Mr. Mark's chance.
>> I'd like to ask some questions about Triple J's hottest 100. Um, >> Now, there have been I'm not cool Senator Smith, but I am interested in the promotion of Australian artists, and that's really where I'm going with this line of questioning. Um, there has been some discussion at least about the quantity of Australian artists featured in the recent countdown of the Triple J hottest 100. Can I start one step before that, which is what role does Triple J play in promoting Australian artists to its
Um it's like without Triple J I think the local music industry um would really suffer. Um there was a beautiful um segment lately where um Kelly Holiday who I think came second holiday >> um according to Senator was robbed um but as a result of the featuring in the hottest 100 that was picked up by international broadcasters who featured that song on their playlists. I think it stands to play on BBC 1 in the UK. Um so just the featuring and the packaging of that content available to Australians. Um and the the platform that provides for artists to be able to um make their services available to you know their their work available to you know broadcast audiences I think can't be underestimated. We take the role of Australian music and our our role in promoting Australian music very seriously. Um I think yeah we were very pleased that this year the hottest 100 more than I think were about 50% of the artists were Australian. Um I think more than 50% of the um music played by Triple J is Australian. I think Double J has about 40%. Um classic country um all of these services that the ABC provides feature heavily often more than 50% Australian music. Um it is a significant commitment by the ABC to continue to work with local artists to feature their music. Um without us um again it's an area a bit like children's programming. Um it's an it's an area where without the ABC I think there would be a huge loss um to a significant part of the industry who've you know achieved many fantastic artists over a long period of time. It's not to say that people can't succeed otherwise, but the ABC is a significant part in doing that. And that commitment to Australian music, I think, is a big part of our our future platform.
So, last year's hottest 100, I think, had the lowest number of Australian artists in a number of years. And that's sort of I think what prompted some of the discussion that I'm talking about here, whereas this year's had significantly more as you've just referred to. What do you put that down to? Was that a deliberate um evaluation
it's hard to say the specific factors. I know in our management team discussions, one of the things since I've started that we've spoken about is our custodianship of Australian music. Um and the importance of that to the industry. Um that's something that I think fed down through the whole organization as to its importance. Um it's something I'd like to see more of from our screen industry, for example, supporting Australian artists. So I think there is more to do. Um, and obviously in the way that Drupal J itself features, promotes artists. Um, the work we do uh with Unear, the work we do with One Night Stand, the work we do with like a version. Um, I don't know if you know many of these brands, this you're nodding, you're a big music fan. Um, some of the Australian artists and their features of, you know, cover tracks through um through like a version, you know, the music is fantastic. So I think featuring that more and taking that on as a responsibility and a real custodianship role like these are the things that the ABC has to commit to. So you know we we get here talk a lot about the news and current affairs organization um but the music part of the ABC and the local radio part of it is significant. The television part of it, our children's programming, our emergency broadcasting, our local radio in every market. I mean there there are many tentacles to the ABC where we reach into communities um in an important way. Of course we can always be better and do better. Um but yes acknowledging the importance of our role in promoting Australian music is something that's very important to us.
>> Now you mentioned um like a version and one night stand and one night stand came to Bustleton last year which was fantastic to see. Um what else is Triple J doing in the live music space to provide opportunities for Australian
Uh yeah, I look I I think um what they're they're expensive one night stands um as you know we uh don't run a significant ticket price um and the and the revenue that comes in um uh often goes to charity which has been you know the history of the organization. Um I'm currently, you know, working with the team to understand if we were to shift um that mentality in any way, what would the implications of that be? And one of the implications would be that we could do more. Um because I think that live music scene, particularly presented in the way that Triple J does, featuring local artists, I think is so important. Um you know as we all know the change in media and actually um real events, real life events, live events are becoming something that is of demand particularly to younger people, younger Australians. Um so it's something that I'd like to do a lot more of. Um so I'm just being told the next one night stand will be in September. I don't know if we know where it's going to be yet. Um but you know I'd like to do more than one per year.
>> More than welcome to come back to Western Australia. Um thank you very much. I'm going to pass on the call now to Senator Najim Price.
so I've got a few more examples of the what appeared on the news ticker. Um, this one here says, "Dispossession, the only true crime white people don't love investigating. government announces people with white savior complex now eligible for NDIS and all white Australians officially declared bankrupt over incalculable debt And then there was a segment of the show called White 10 based on obviously Mer Why is the ABC leadership endorsing
>> Senate? I don't believe we are endorsing racism. I think quite the opposite. I think we're probably
>> Well, why don't you have a white com comedian saying such things about black people on the program or Aboriginal people in the same vein? >> Would you do that? >> Would the ABC do that? >> I think it's pretty evident you you
>> we should let chair >> uh I think Mr. Marks needs to be given the opportunity to actually answer the question without constant interruptions.
>> I will I will take that as a point of order but I um think that as as I indicated to Senator Hanson Young before if if a point of order is being raised if you wouldn't mind just saying point of order first. Um I wasn't in the I wasn't in the >> I wasn't in the chair at the moment that that was happening. I was speaking to um Senator Henderson so I missed what happened but I will now pay closer attention. Please continue. Senator
>> Yes.
>> Sorry Senator I've forgotten a question.
>> Why is the ABC encouraging racism?
>> I don't think we are encouraging racism. Uh Senator I think exactly what that show was designed to do and we can all um have a view on whether it achieved it or not was to raise and make awareness of important issues. So h
>> sorry sorry stop. Can how how specifically how does how do these attacks on white Australians the only true crime white people don't love investigating sorry can you please tell me how that is supposedly
>> Senator Hanson thank you Senator Hanson your principles and stop by explaining >> senators >> sorry. I appreciate this. Not senators. Don't like the answers to the questions principles. Eenators explaining
sit back and let the ABC attacked
selections. >> Senators, it's an audition. Let's senators >> let's let's senators Senator Green Senator Hanson Young let's take the temperature down in the room for a moment and let us say this let me say this and I've said it so many times I'm sure people are sick of me saying it but this process works better when a senator asks questions and the witness answers them. That is the process we're going through at the moment. Um Senator Najima Price is asking a question. Senator Marks will be given an opportunity. Senator Marks, sorry. I've done this to you twice now. Apparently, it was Dr. Marks last time. Um, but you will be
>> are entitled to ask their questions without interruption, but witnesses are also entitled to provide their answers
>> Absolutely. And and that is the process that we well hold on, Senator Henderson. That goes both ways. >> That doesn't that doesn't need a
>> especially in this session, but
>> that doesn't that doesn't need qualification. >> Um, let's let's giving you an answer,
Senator. It's a satirical comedy program. We may not like the comedy. We may have comments on it. We may have views on it. >> But that is the point of comedy. The point of comedy often, particularly sir, could satirical comedy is to raise serious questions and to be confronting. So we can all have discussions about the individual jokes that are raised, but I don't think that's going to be productive for us today. It was a comedy show. It was designed to be satirical. It is going to be confronting by its nature. and and and I don't I stand by the program and the importance of it in terms of the ABC's overall offering as you say of the material that we provide to the public. So, um we can go backwards and forwards about each joke, but but and we can have different views on each joke, but
>> it's it's really not a joke. It's racism and you're dressing it up as a joke.
>> Senator, I'm not dressing up each one as a joke. The whole comedy, the whole program is a satirical look at an important issue faced by indigenous Australians in the context of what is a very
>> No, sorry. Sorry, Senators. Senators, now I appreciate Senator Senator Henderson and Senator Najima Price. >> Senator, no sorry Mr. M just for one moment. Just as I will endeavor to prevent interruptions, you must also allow the witness to finish their answer and then you'll have a chance to ask the Mr. Marks, had you finished your answer or did you want to complete?
>> I think so. I think it's a satirical comedy program. I don't think there's real gain to be had in this forum of looking at each individual piece of dialogue and examining at its worthiness to the context of the program. I think looking at the program overall as a whole, the program as over overall as a whole was an important contribution to an important issue um that a lot of people uh feel strongly about and there will be many people that will feel >> that uh senator that um many people feel strongly about issues particularly younger Australians about colonization about the the issues isues faced by indigenous Australians about the disproportional uh number of people in detention about indigenous health care outcomes and sometimes the way to do those and to make awareness of those issues is through satirical comedy that's what this show was and I stand by its important contribution to that discussion
>> I think it fails it fails miserably to draw any attention especially when in the closing monologue Mr. Armstrong says, "I'm sure you're expecting me to use this moment to do a big viral speech about what January 26 means and why you, the good white people watching, that's not satire. That's denigration. That's that's ought to feel real sad." But the problem is, you already know, you've heard it before, you know it's wrong. Don't be a dog. Don't be a dog. I mean, seriously, is the ABC's intent for Australians to feel sad about January 6, and if they don't feel sad, they are a dog.
>> Senator, there's a presentation style that also goes with that dialogue. Um, again, I stand by my comments. Um, we can all have views about the success of the program. We can all have views about its appeal or not appeal. It was a satirical comedy program about issues faced by um by you know an important part of the community. Many people have strong opinions. You have strong opinions. Others have strong opinions. That's kind of what the ABC often is here to do. Um you know it is one part of the town square of discussion. So um it's done in a satirical comedy way. I can sense how offended you are by it. I also know that many people were really
like the program. Because because the offense comes from the fact that you do not offer you do not offer the other side of the argument in any form whatsoever, whether satirical or whether straight down the line. You fail miserably to do that. But you continually project these concepts into the Australian audience where there's young impressionable Australians that look to you and you fail to offer anything to the contrary to any of this. And let me let me put something to you that someone like myself who stands up for the fact and points this out to our broadcaster is by supporters of your position and this racism attack me by calling me a sellout, a coconut, a Jackie Jackie, a a an Uncle Tom. They're the sorts of things that your satire hah funny funny actually encourages in this country. And I would urge you as the public broadcaster to take these issues far more seriously, especially in the current climate that we're dealing with a divided nation where racial vilification of any kind, whether presented in a sat satrical way, is unacceptable because you would not do it from a white person's perspective to a black person. You just would not do and and you know you wouldn't as the ABC. I've got my last lot of questions here that I'd like to On the 16th of December during the Politics Now podcast, journalist Laura Tingle said that the actions of the Bondi terrorists had nothing to do with religion. Contrary to all evidence, Miss Tingle dismissed the connection between the terrorists and radical Islam. So in short, Miss Tingle distorted the truth. But consider the following distortions of the truth to in the con context of the ABC's commentary around former Prime Minister Scott Morrison's ideas to tackle radical Islam. On January 28th on ABC Radio National Breakfast, host Sally Sara quoted a text message from a listener that asked whether the Christian community should take responsibility for Nazi hate speech. Then on the 29th of January on ABC Sydney Mornings on the ABC Sydney Mornings with the host Hamish Macdonald he said when we look at the language used by neo-Nazi groups for example they rely on Christian tradition or thought. Why is the ABC dismissing the true connection between Islam and terrorism which is evident in a litany of examples from the September 11 attacks through to
>> I'm happy to take that one if you'd like. Senator. Uh so firstly, if I can work my way through these things. You mentioned the Politics Now podcast. Um I think it's worth noting that that has there has been there were a number of complaints. there was an investigation into that by the ombbudsman's office uh and that was cleared of being any editorial breach. I think uh with a a program that is a podcast uh the the program needs to be listened to it to in its entirety. I think when you listen to the program it is very clear that the the program was not suggesting that there was no connection of religion around uh the terrible attack at Bondi. uh it was clear that Jewish Australians were targeted and the program made that very clear on a number of occasions. Um I am not aware of all the detail about the comments that you raised about the RN breakfast program. Uh but I would note that as you said it was a letter or a comment from an audience member that was read out. So uh we'd have to go and have a look at that a little bit more. Uh but clearly that was a question that was put to I think you said uh Mr. Bragg uh in that in that uh interview and you know we put questions to to politicians all the time to ask for their reaction. On the final point about Islam uh that you I think you raised um the ABC has done extensive reporting for a very long period of time about the impact of radicalization on uh and the and radical links uh between um radical Islam and some acts of terrorism. I mean, we our four corners program has broken a number of stories over the past couple of years, including only just last year about links to radical Islamic preachers and um claims and allegations of of connection to to radicalization and to to acts of um to illegal acts. Now, we are doing extensive reporting in these areas and we don't shy away from doing that. What we don't seek to do is to broadly suggest that any particular religious ideology uh broadly is responsible for all types of attacks.
>> So why is the ABC confing a non-existent connection between Christianity and
Well, I think in that instance uh from my understanding of the question that came from the audience member, it was essentially saying drawing a drawing attempting to draw an analogy to suggest why do some people suggest that all Islam is responsible for terrorism? Why is the question not asked? Why is not all Christianity responsible for other issues? and the audience member asked the question and that was put and and uh a response was sought.
>> Well, that was Hamish McDonald's comment. It was his comment. When we look at the language used by neo-Nazi groups, for example, they rely on Christian tradition or thought.
>> Well, I'd have to go back and have a look at that full program to be able to give you a proper response to that,
>> Okay. uh chair if you if I if I just uh look I I know we are time is marching on so we are endeavoring to get through the issues as quickly as we can. Mr. Marks one of the ways in which I believe the ABC frequently misrepresents the facts or or fails to tell both sides of the story is by its decision as to who it selects for third party commentators who have a particular view. Um, for instance, the Jewish Council of Australia is frequently relied upon by the ABC when it has a very distinct and different view to many other Jewish organizations. Amy Ramikas, who's part of the Extreme Left Institute, the Australia Institute. She's the chief political analyst. So what I'm going to ask and I don't see the IPA I don't see the Australian Jewish Association for instance appearing nearly as frequently very infrequently if at all in the case of the AJA uh as the commentators such as uh Amy Ramikas and Sarah Schwarz from the Jewish Council of Australia. What I'm seeking from you is an audit. So uh over the last two years uh are you able to provide this committee with an audit as to which spokespeople have appeared on which television programs because there is a real tendency to push a particular view through the spokespeople who are selected to appear on ABC television programs and I'm talking news and information programs.
>> do you want me to answer that?
>> Clearly, there are very important impartiality obligations on the ABC, but I I am very concerned um about this trend and I know in the case of the Jewish Council of Australia, this has been raised before because as I say, accuracy and impartiality are paramount. are you happy to do that?
>> Well, let me let me answer the question briefly and then I'll ask Mr. Fang to respond to that because it it's part of the work that Mr. Fang regularly does >> um to look at the balance of those matters over time. So, there will already been some work done.
>> Well, when I'm asking whether you you're happy, what I'm asking is if you can provide that information.
>> Sure, Senator. No, we we can look at what we what we can what we can provide. But um often I mean bit like the discussion we're having today, the Jewish community often as well is not one community. There are many different components of every community. Um
>> I I didn't say that, but I'm just saying.
>> No, I'm just answering your question. And the and the question sometimes means you do need to seek other voices to to seek to attempt to find other parts of the community who may have a different similar or or contrary view to to various parts. So I do think it's important that we just don't rely on one commentator to represent a community. >> No, I'm not suggesting that. What I'm
suggesting is that there's been a tendency, Mr. marks to favor uh those commentators who sit very squarely on the left of politics and there is not impartiality exercised in relation to seeking a diversity of views.
>> Yeah, I mean I don't believe that's the case but Mr. Fan you've done many reviews on this and can talk to what we can provide to the senator.
>> Yeah, thank you. Um I believe Senator that uh a a question like this uh occurred last year and we did provide on notice uh what we could reasonably provide about um uh about variety of different um sources and perspectives that we'd put on. It is difficult to do a broad um capture of all of our output given you know what's archived etc. But I I can say that you know last when I last looked at this um we had done more than 350 plus stories about anti-semitism over a period of uh the last 18 months. We had a wide variety of Jewish Jewish Australians that we had had on the ABC. You know parents of kids at schools talking about issues around security. um everybody from uh the you know the executive council of Australian jewelry the um the special envoy to combat anti-semitism um we had spoken to multiple rabbis uh and community leaders um we had tackled a wide variety of perspectives across the community now you are correct that we have at times um uh interviewed u members uh members of the Jewish Council of Australia where they are relevant um But you know the what I have looked at previously and what I can give you a commitment around is that we have widely spoken to many people in the Jewish community uh regularly and including over the past couple of years and you only have to look back at some of the reporting we've done only in the past couple of weeks to see the the wide variety of people from the community that we have spoken to.
>> Well Mr. Fang, I'm just going to ask for that audit over the last two years, perhaps from one July one July 2024 until this point in time because I there may well have been some improvements in relation to anti-semitism matters in recent months. I mean, we certainly have raised this before, but I am concerned that there has been an inherent problem within the ABC where left-wing commentators such as Amy Ramikas and others like her have been very frequently uh relied upon in terms of in terms of in terms of running commentary. The the other one that I would just ask about is Paul Bonelov. He's still a regular contributor to the ABC.
>> Uh, Senator, just in relation to the um one July 2024, we'll see what we can do to answer that question. Um, I'm not uh uh we would have to see what we still hold. So, we'll see what we can reasonably do to answer that question appropriately. Paul Bonjouro, I I have not
>> You're not deleting all the tapes like you did with Countdown, are you, Mr. Fang? Surely you're keeping records of all
>> but we make up a wide variety of content across radio news and and live content and the like. Uh it it's just a
>> well maybe what maybe I might take this offline and perhaps I can provide >> a question on notice which stipulates perhaps a range of programs too
openended >> make it more
>> make it more confined and doable uh which sort of focuses on using current affairs because I do think there is a problem and I would like to see that rectified in terms of your statutory obligations. Uh but maybe I'll come back to you and I I will confine my
>> that would be helpful. Thank you. Uh
Paul Bonjouro parameters.
>> I have not heard Paul Bonjouro on the ABC for a while. I'm sorry I can't confirm that he's still working or or contributing. And uh and if Paul is, I apologize that I haven't heard him on the radio for a while. It's not
deliberate. Well, look, I'm really concerned about, you know, if you are going to choose commentators, Paul Bonjouro, frankly, has espoused some disgraceful views. Uh, violent oppression begets violent resistance. Uh, the Federal Royal Commission into Bondi is the wrong option. I mean, I that's just his view. I'm whatever. That
>> apologies, Senator. Were these on the ABC you're saying or was
>> No, this is Paul Bonjouro and I'm just wondering he was a regular contributor to ABC radio national I believe but >> I am particularly concerned about that post where he says violent oppression begets violent resistance in the context
>> we can find out whether
>> the anti-semitism issues facing the crisis facing our country. you know, there's there's other there's other comments which are deeply offensive uh which I will also provide on notice as well.
>> But you're not suggesting he's saying that on the ABC what you've just read some things that
>> that's right. So, so what I'm concerned about again, Senator Hanson Young, is I'm concerned about the selection of commentators by the ABC where the ABC has a predisposition to selecting left-wing uh commentators without having impartial regard to impartiality across the board. So, I think that's not something that really does need to be addressed.
>> I understand the question, Senator, and we can certainly um check.
>> Okay. I'm trying if we could narrow the timeline a bit and the programs.
>> I I will because I'm interested in the
>> what's happening now and over the last maybe 12 months we go back two years I think it's more difficult I think over the last 12 month just a suggestion Senator
>> I I will confine my question I understand that the the difficulties can I quickly please move to the ABC's partnership with AON you indicated in last estimates you were going to review that partnership Mr. remarks. Have you reviewed the partnership and do you have anything to update the committee on?
>> Senator, we I think discussed at the last estimates that Mr. Fang and myself would do a review of all of our potential partnerships across the organization uh with an understanding that the integrity and independence of the ABC is paramount. Um Mr. Fang and I have made a lot of progress on that review. We're now in the final stages of assessing the recommendations that we are considering out of that and I would imagine by the time we're back in estimates which I think is not too far away um we'll be able to provide a final view on all of that.
>> Mr. Marks this is Senate estimates so if you have formed a view I'm asking for that answer now please. I think our view
is we are concerned about things that have any essence of a perception of uh implicating the independence or integrity of the organization
>> and so what action are you going to take in relation to this partnership? So
those are the steps that we need to fully understand what those steps will be. But um we take on board the concern. We share it um and we intend to act to protect um the perception of the integrity of the organization.
>> So can I read into that that you are going to discontinue your partnership with AON?
>> There might be various options that we can consider. So I don't want to prejudge the actual decision, but all I'm saying is we've made good progress on the work. Um and I I would imagine before the next estimates we will be um finalizing that activity and it's but by the way it's not just Acon there's a number of things that we have to look at.
>> Sure. As I made the point you shouldn't be having partnerships with any organization which seeks to influence the ABC or impinge on the editorial independence of the ABC. We are
concerned about anything that um implies or uh an obligation on our editorial content or creates a high risk of perception of interference in ABC integrity and independence.
>> What do you pay for that partnership by the way? What's the
>> um Miss Blind index participation? I mean it's under $10,000 I think. >> Oh, Mr. Fang's got it.
>> The membership fee for last year was um $6,990.
>> So, that's the total amount that you're paying to AON.
>> That's a I think sorry if I can jump in that I I think there there are a few other um elements. So on average and I think we've provided some information on a question on notice uh 2874 um that we have on average paid $10,000 peranom or thereabouts over the last few years and I think another question that was asked within that question on notice is um have we disclosed why haven't we disclosed the expenditure in the ABC's annual report and the answer being that there is no reporting requirement to do so. So that is in 2874.
>> Okay. So Mr. Marks, you you've said you're concerned about this partnership. Can you just expand on the reasons for your concern?
>> Well, it's not just the partnership, that partnership, Senator. concerned about anything um that exists in the organization that in requires us to submit to um assessment against editorial content that has any editorial content matters to it because we accept that that has the risk of perception of interference in our editorial matters. So it's a wide ranging review. AON is one our partnership with AON is one part of that review. Um but we felt it was important to extend that review to not just that particular organization. So that's got some complexity to it. There's a number of different aspects to that. Um but again as I said we're well progressed. I think um I've expressed the basis on which we are approaching that review and I think you can take
>> I'm cognizant of the time. I have many other issues before me but um the chair is looking at me eagerly to encourage me to to move and I
>> How much more do you guys have?
>> I'm trying to I'm trying to finish before dinner. So I Senator Hanson can I just ask I don't want to dwell on this one. The Bonnie Blue Facebook There was there was that could you just explain how
>> actually I mean my understanding is it was as much a meta issue as an ABC issue. >> Um so I think our technology teams remain in discussion with meta about whatever vulnerabilities might um exist that might open those potentials. Obviously we quickly identified it and fixed it. Um but yeah our technology teams remain in discussion with Meta.
>> So which social media platform was hacked? Facebook was it hacked? Um, yes
it was and someone took control of the content. Um, and uh, but we quickly rectified it and shut it down. But, um, it was both, but as I said, we're still talking to Meta about how that could
>> And so, do you know how it did happen?
>> Uh, we we we haven't finished the review until we really get all that information
involvement of ABC systems platforms or staff?
>> As you know, all of these things um are probably an individual decision or or action at a time. But again, I'm I understand that it's the systems of meta that also have an implication here, which to be able to fully answer your question, I need to have that
information. Look, if we could have that because obviously the publication on one of your social media platforms of any inappropriate material or any pornographic material. Was the material pornographic?
>> Um I didn't actually see it. Senator Mr. Fang shaking his head
>> was just
>> I think it was tasteful Bonnie Blue.
>> Right. Okay. So uh but obviously the hacking
>> is a concern
>> is a is a very serious concern. So, what actions have you taken to secure your accounts?
>> Again, to be able to fully answer that question, Senator, um I need to have the resolution of the conversations with Meta. Um so, that's something that we can look at um providing when that
I will put my other questions on notice. I did commit to the chair that I would try and finish by 6:30. >> So, um, can I just thank you all very much for your time and for the commitment that you've made to be here today. Thanks, chair.
>> Um, thank you, Senator Henderson. I really appreciate that. Um,
>> I'm sorry, I forgot one thing.
>> Okay. Spoke too soon.
>> Sorry. Sorry. I just want, this is a light-hearted comment. my my interaction with Sarah Ferguson in the parliamentary corridor which happened before the last estimates. I wasn't planning to raise it. I didn't raise it in the last estimates. Happy to have robust discussions uh in relation to my work in relation to my observations uh about the ABC but I think it was leaked u by Sarah or someone close to Sarah. but in in all seriousness, Mr. Marks, my door is always open. Uh if ever there are issues in relation to my prosecution of issues concerning the ABC, I'm very happy to meet with anyone um including Sarah Ferguson.
>> Thank you, Senator. I'm Miss Ferguson is not someone that I have to worry about. Um she is a a a very strong individual as I'm sure uh you are. and I unfortunately missed the conversation. Um uh I only heard reports of it.
>> Well, Raph Epstein was the uh witness and and she's a strong individual as am I. I think she was a bit stronger than I was on that occasion. Uh but be that as it may, I look forward to continuing robust discussions. >> Thank you. Thanks, Chair.
>> Thank you very much, Senator Henderson. Um I will now do two things. I will excuse the officers of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Thank you for your attendance here today, your evidence and the work that goes into preparation for these hearings. Um, we will call the officers of the Special Broadcasting Service after dinner at 7:15. I'm also in a position now um to release the Museum of Australian Democracy offices, the National Gallery of Australia offices, and the offices of the NBN co. I thank my colleagues for their cooperation in that respect. So, thank you very much and we're adjourned