Jack Robertson is Webdiary’s ‘Meeja Watch’ columnist. He has reported previously on his long quest for the truth of the anti-Wilkie leak in Andrew Bolt: I did ‘go through’ leaked top secret report by Wilkie, Wilkie, Bolt and ONA at odds over top secret report and Wilkie: Blame ‘outrageous’ PM, not top spies.
A Meeja Watch salute to Tom Allard, who obviously still understands that only reporters can SET news agendas; and with a sympathetic shrug for News Wimited�s Malcolm Farr, who of course we fully understand must be under enormous pwessure fwom Uncle Wupert not to investigate Abu Ghwaib-gate too cwosewy. Poor widdle Pwess Gawewy Pwesident.
From the One Letter to the Past � Salute to a Lemming Pack
Dear Mainstream Australian Press, circa early 2003,
You got to write the mainstream newspaper columns. You got to ride the airwaves on talkback radio. You graced our television screens on shows like Meet the Press, The Insiders and Sunday. You composed our broadsheet leaders, you selected what opinions about Iraq were aired in the Op Eds, and you decided what pre-war questions our elected leaders were asked, and how persistently and pedantically and impolitely.
Which was �not very�, on all three counts.
As Mr Phillip Knightley, one of the great war and security issue reporters, recently reminded us all here at Webdiary in principle, and as Mr Allard is showing us in practice now: only news reporters can set the news agenda, only stubborn and persistent footsloggers can MAKE the wider public �interested� (or �uninterested�) in the stories that count.
The Lance Collins story, say – or the Andrew Wilkie one (or that of any of the other Iraq war whistleblowers, back then in early 2003 when it really mattered). Only you get to sit up the front in the high-powered press conferences, Laurie Oakes. Only you got a one-on-one interview with the most powerful man in the world, Paul Kelly. You�re among the very few Australians who get to know our politicians� spin doctors, Michelle Grattan, who hear the inside stories and the hot gossip, Kerry O�Brien, who catch a glimpse behind the scenes, Matt Price and Mike Seccombe and Karen Middleton and David Penberthy.
Unlike us angry, impolite, untrained amateurs, you journalists get to carry a press card. You get to go to the Press Club lunches. You get invited to the politicians� end-of-year knees-ups, and some of you, like your Press Gallery President Malcolm Farr, even get to hang out at the PM�s private barbeques. (Way to get a scoop, Mr Woodward – STOP THE PRESS: MAN OF STEEL PREFERS MUSTARD, NOT SAUCE, ON HIS T-BONE!!! Malcolm Farr reports exclusively from the frontline.)
You �professional� reporters get special passes and privileges and protection in war zones, seats on the politicians� aeroplanes that take you there for Anzac Day, and access of all sorts to faraway centres of global power, giving you a close-up look at the people whose decisions can end up killing and maiming us nobodies. You�re our eyes and ears and, during question times, especially our very blunt tongues, and we expect you to use those �free press� privileges to help ensure that when we and our nobody loved ones do waltz off to fight yet another �war to end all wars�, there really is no other option. It really is a �last resort�.
Most of all, when it goes a bit wrong (as wars always do), we expect you to be there to ensure that our soldiers ARE given moral, legal and political top-cover by the politicians who sent them, not left to flap about in the breeze of the Senate Estimates Committee-room as Prime Ministers and Defence Ministers cut and run for cover.
Once again, precisely as we here at Webdiary predicted would happen, eighteen months ago.
Don�t let it happen, Canberra Bubble. Do NOT let our soldiers down again. Do NOT allow a few sundry Lieutenant-Colonels or Grade Five public servants alone swing for this shameful abnegation of Ministerial responsibility. It�s up to you to force the Australian public to understand what is happening (again); to thrust the political buck-passing and bum-covering now going on over Abu Ghraib abuses repeatedly into the public consciousness, until we citizens start fulfilling our democratic responsibilities too, whether we like it or not. It�s our collective civic obligation; we don�t have the luxury of �choice� anymore, because the Iraq War is every last Australian�s war now.
Pro-war, anti-war, or dumbed-down by Reality TV & grasping materialism into stupified oblivion. Oh dear me, do excuse moi for not kissing the �ordinary Australian�s� lazy, ignorant butt. There goes my shot at elected Australian office! Boo-hoo-hoo.
Unlike modern politicians and �small target� pollsters and billioniare media barons and millionaire talkback toffs and condescending, Quadrant-editing, right-wing columnists, serious news reporters and news editors are NOT there to suck up to the filthy masses. If you privileged Canberra Bubblers won�t embrace the responsibility that comes with being a part of Australia�s intellectual leadership – for fear of being called an �elitist� by Piers or Bolt or Devine – then kindly step aside and let ME have your bloody column on the Op Ed page, Paul Kelly. Let ME compose your vacuous autocue wafflings, Barrie Cassidy. Let us amateurs who will gladly do it for free have a go at asking awkward questions in press conferences. Frankly, we can�t mess it up any more than you �professionals� have thus far.
The invasion and occupation of Iraq wasn�t remotely scrutinsed by the �free� press when you all had the chance, and that a smug, sniggering ABC regular like Farr is your Press Gallery President is supremely symptomatic. It�s time you Canberra Bubble lemmings started to examine � very publicly, in the scarce public forums you so lazily occupy – how badly you failed us, why exactly you failed us, and what you now intend to do about it.
Where are all the mainstream mea culpas? You lot were suckered over this war almost to a man and woman, and no amount of ironic sophistication there on the Insiders� couch next Sunday can disguise that fact, Malcolm, Barry and Co. D�oh!
***
One Letter to the Present � Anatomy of (Another) �Un-newsworthy� Story
Dear Mainstream Australian Press, circa mid 2004,
OK, so Loony-Left �told you so� rant over. What can you do about it? Need more encouragement from us, the public who desperately want to support you? Need any hints about what we might regard as the �public interest�?
Try this, say: the Wilkie-Bolt Leak remains of great interest to us. It�s a news story. If you want it to be, that is. It�s up to you to make it one, though; not me (I�m an amateur wannabe), and not Wilkie (he�s got a partisan Green agenda now) or any other whistle-blower, either. As Knightly says, only new reporters can set the news agenda; and then only if they want to. But you have to start asking the right awkward questions of the right powerful people, instead of tamely sitting back and waiting for the next press release or leak or blown whistle.
It�s not that hard, Malcolm. Like I said, even us amateurs can do it. Or have a clumsy go at it, at least. Laurie? Paul? Michelle? Hullo? Hullo, Canberra Bubble?
***
1. JACK AND THE PM
From: Jack Robertson. To: The Prime Minister’s Office. Date: 29 April 2004
Attention Prime Minister’s Press Officer Willie Herron
Dear Mr Herron (sic – Willie’s a woman),
I write a Meeja Watch column for Margo Kingston’s SMH online Web Diary. I’m currently preparing a story for the website regarding the alleged leak of a Top Secret ONA intelligence analysis in mid 2003 to journalist Andrew Bolt, who allegedly referred to information it contained in a Sun-Herald article of 23 June. The story is based upon new claims made by the report’s primary author, former ONA analyst Andrew Wilkie. Mr Wilkie has made the following claim on record, which I intend to publish on Margo Kingston’s website:
“I know for sure that it’s on the record in ONA that – [deleted for Webdiary to avoid compromising the AFP investigation] – asked for and received an additional copy of that report only days before the Bolt article.”
I now respectfully seek the Prime Minister’s written response to the following question:
1. Did the Prime Minister’s office ask for and receive an additional copy from ONA of a Top Secret report concerning humanitarian aspects of an invasion of Iraq (compiled by Andrew Wilkie and first issued in late 2002/early 2003) some time in June 2003?
*
From: Jack Robertson. To: The Prime Minister’s Office. Date: 4 May 2004
Attention Prime Minister’s Press Officer Willie Herron
Dear Mr Herron,
I refer you to my respectful emailed request for a written response from Prime Minister Howard submitted last Thursday 29 April as per below. I note that I have yet to receive a response from Mr Howard, and respectfully re-submit my request now.
Jack Robertson
*
From: Willie Herron. To: Jack Robertson. Date: 4 May 2004.
Dear Mr Robertson,
Apologies for the delay in responding to your email. My response to you is “The AFP are investigating this issue so it is inappropriate to make any comment”.
Regards, WH
***
2. JACK AND DOWNER
From: Jack Robertson. To: The Foreign Minister’s Office. Date: 29 April 2004
Attention Foreign Minister’s Press Officer Chris Kenny
Dear Mr Kenny,
I write a Meeja Watch column for Margo Kingston’s SMH online Web Diary. I’m currently preparing a story for the website regarding the alleged leak of a Top Secret ONA intelligence analysis in mid 2003 to journalist Andrew Bolt, who allegedly referred to information it contained in a Sun-Herald article of 23 June. The story is based upon new claims made by the report’s primary author, former ONA analyst Andrew Wilkie. Mr Wilkie has made the following claim on record, which I intend to publish on Margo Kingston’s website:
“I know for sure that it’s on the record in ONA that – [deleted for Webdiary to avoid compromising the AFP investigation] – asked for and received an additional copy of that report only days before the Bolt article.”
I now respectfully seek the Foreign Minister’s written response to the following question:
1. Did the Foreign Minister’s office ask for and receive an additional copy from ONA of a Top Secret report concerning humanitarian aspects of an invasion of Iraq (compiled by Andrew Wilkie and first issued in late 2002/early 2003) some time in June 2003?
*
From: Jack Robertson. To: The Foreign Minister’s Office. Date: 4 May 2004
Attention Foreign Minister’s Press Officer Chris Kenny.
Dear Mr Kenny,
I refer you to my respectful emailed request for a written response from Foreign Minister Downer submitted last Thursday 29 April as per below. I note that I have yet to receive a response from Mr Downer, and respectfully re-submit my request now.
Jack Robertson
*
From: Chris Kenny. To: Jack Robertson
Date: 7 May 2004
I have responded clearly and directly to you in a phone call. *
Chris Kenny, Media Adviser, Minister for Foreign Affairs
* In our telephone conversation (29 April) Mr Kenny told me that it was not appropriate to comment on the issue since it was the subject of an AFP investigation, and also that �these rumours� had been around for a while, and it was �old news�.
***
3. JACK AND ONA, WILKIE’S FORMER EMPLOYER
From: Jack Robertson. To: Mr Peter Varghese. Date: 30 April 2004.
Dear Mr Varghese,
I write a Meeja Watch column for Margo Kingston’s SMH online Web Diary. I’m currently preparing a story for the website regarding the alleged leak of a Top Secret ONA intelligence analysis in mid 2003 to journalist Andrew Bolt, who has recently confirmed to me that he referred directly to a copy of that report while writing an article for the Melbourne Herald-Sun which was published on 23 June. The story is based upon new claims made by that classified ONA report’s primary author, former ONA analyst Andrew Wilkie.
Mr Wilkie has made the following claim on record, which I intend to publish on Margo Kingston’s website:
“I know for sure that it’s on the record in ONA that – [deleted for Webdiary to avoid compromising the AFP investigation] – asked for and received an additional copy of that report only days before the Bolt article.”
I respectfully seek an ONA written response to the following questions:
1. Is it on the record in ONA that – [deleted to avoid compromising the AFP investigation – asked for and received from ONA a copy of Andrew Wilkie’s December 2002 analysis of humanitarian aspects of an Iraq invasion at some time in June 2003?”
2. Since 23 June 2003, have you or any other members of ONA been interviewed by the Australian Federal Police in relation to an alleged leak of this report to the journalist Andrew Bolt?
3. Has the AFP team currently investigating that alleged leak to date sought and been given by ONA full access to the ONA records regarding all movements of this report in June 2003?
*
To: Mr Peter Varghese, Director-General. Office of National Assessments. Date: 4 May 2004.
Dear Mr Varghese,
I refer you to my respectful emailed request for a written response from ONA sent last Friday 30 April as per below. I note that I have yet to receive a response from ONA, and respectfully re-submit my request now.
Jack Robertson
***
4. JACK AND THE AFP
From: Jack Robertson. To: Ms K—-, AFP. Date: 30 April 30, 2004.
Dear Ms K—-,
As per as phone conversation of this morning, below please find a copy of the email I sent to the AFP National Media Centre this morning. I would be grateful if AFP were to provide a written AFP response to the questions below. Naturally I understand that with regard to the security and privacy aspects of any on-going investigation, the AFP may be unable to respond as fully as I might like. Not-with-standing the specific queries below, however, I would be very appreciative – especially with a keen view to helping ensure AFP retains the high level of confidence the public has maintained in it as an investigative body since the excellent Bali bombing results – if AFP could provide me with as full an update on the status of the alleged Bolt leak investigation as is possible.
Ms K—-, thank you very much for your time and courtesy,
Jack Robertson
*
From: Jack Robertson. To: National Media Centre, Australian Federal Police, via public website national media contact email address. Date: 30 April 2004. Attention Ms Jane O’Brien, Co-ordinator Media Manager (Canberra Head Office). Attention (subject): Enquiries regarding the AFP investigation into an alleged leak of ONA material to journalist Andrew Bolt in 2003
Dear Ms O’Brien/to whom it may otherwise concern,
I write a Meeja Watch column for Margo Kingston’s SMH online Web Diary. I’m currently preparing a story for the website regarding the alleged leak of a Top Secret ONA intelligence analysis in mid 2003 to journalist Andrew Bolt, who has recently confirmed to me that he referred directly to a copy of that report while writing an article for the Melbourne Herald-Sun which was published on 23 June. I understand that an AFP investigation into this alleged leak is on-going.
In light of new allegations about the ONA record of the handling and distribution of copies of that report in June last year, recently made to me on-record by the report’s primary author the former ONA analyst Andrew Wilkie and which I intend publishing on Margo Kingston’s website, I respectfully seek an AFP written response to the following questions:
1. Has the AFP team investigating the alleged leak of the report to date interviewed the journalist Andrew Bolt about the leak?
2. Has the AFP team investigating the alleged leak to date sought and been granted full access to the ONA records covering the distribution and handling of the report in June 2003?
3. Has the AFP team investigating the alleged leak to date interviewed any staff in either the Prime Minister’s or Foreign Minister’s offices?
Jack Robertson
*
From: Jack Robertson. To: Ms K—-, Australian Federal Police. Date: 4 May 2004.
Dear Ms K—,
I refer you to my emailed request for a written response from the AFP sent to you for forwarding to Ms Jane O’Brien (or whom it may other concern) last Friday 30 April as per below. Ms K—, I note that I have yet to receive a response from AFP. I note also that you are not directly responsible for providing me with a response and apologise for troubling you again, but beg your kind indulgence in respectfully re-submitting my request to the appropriate AFP media officers.
Yours sincerely, and with warm thanks for your trouble,
Jack Robertson
*
From: Ms K—-. To: Jack Robertson. Date: 4 May 2004.
Hi Jack,
I haven’t forgotten you. I will attempt to assist you with your enquiry as soon as possible, and hopefully get back to you tomorrow. Kind Regards
Ms K—-, Australian Federal Police
*
From: Jack Robertson. To: Ms K—-, AFP. Date: 7 May 2004. Information copies: The Honourable Phillip Ruddock, MP, Attorney-General, Mr Kevin Rudd, MP, Opposition spokesperson for Foreign Affairs
(NB: Information copies via email; see exclusion note below; NB: I also note for the record and with my warm thanks the courteous and professional assistance AFP public servant/officer Ms K—- has to the best of her ability and sphere of responsibility provided me so far.)
Dear Ms K—,
I refer you to my emailed request for a written response from the AFP sent to you for forwarding to Ms Jane O’Brien (or whom it may other concern) last Friday 30 April, and resubmitted via you on Tuesday 4 May as per below.
Ms K—-, I note once again that I have yet to receive a response from AFP. Once again I note that you are not directly responsible for providing me with a response and apologise for troubling you again, but respectfully re-submit my request to the appropriate AFP officers. I also now further request advice ASAP from the AFP regarding the following:
It is my intention to publish on Margo Kingston’s Webdiary at some point in the future the following allegation that may relate to the alleged ONA leak, one that has been made to me on-record by former ONA analyst Andrew Wilkie. I am currently seeking a response to this allegation from the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister and ONA. Mr Wilkie has told me (the substance of this allegation has been OMITTED from Mr Ruddock’s and Mr Rudd’s information copies):
“I know for sure that it’s on the record in ONA that — [deleted for Webdiary to avoid compromising the AFP investigation] — asked for and received an additional copy of that report only days before the Bolt article.”
Ms K—, I would be grateful if you could advise the relevant AFP officers that I am determined to publish this allegation in the public interest if I am unable to assure myself as a citizen that the investigation into this leak is being pursued by AFP with full vigour. however, I am also anxious not to compromise the AFP’s on-going investigations in any way. To that end, not-with-standing my other outstanding queries below, can AFP please advise me as a matter of priority of their response to the following two questions:
Question One: Will it compromise the on-going AFP investigation into the alleged leak of the Top Secret ONA report to journalist Andrew Bolt if I publish on Margo Kingston’s Webdiary Mr Wilkie’s allegation as above?
Question Two: If so, does the AFP formally request me NOT to publish the allegation as above at this stage?
Ms K—-, please advise the relevant AFP officers that in the interests of not compromising any on-going investigation I will readily comply with any explicit AFP written request regarding this allegation at this stage, but that I also reserve the right to make public note – without divulging allegation details – on Margo Kingston’s Webdiary of any such request from AFP.
Ms K—, please take care to advise the relevant AFP officers that I have also forwarded information copies of this email (LESS allegation details) – to Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock and Opposition Foreign Affairs spokesperson Kevin Rudd, the latter of whom I understand from recent media reports has also recently written to AG and AFP expressing his concern at the lack of progress of the Bolt leak investigation.
Finally, Ms K—-, please accept my apologies again for communicating with AFP via your email address and for taking what you may regard as the liberty of placing on the record (via information copies) with both Government and Opposition my on-going pursuit of some – any – information from AFP regarding this matter. I am well aware that you are not directly responsible for this matter, but I am anxious to ensure that my various requests are dealt with appropriately and promptly.
Yours sincerely, and with warm thanks for your trouble again,
Jack Robertson
***
From: Ms K—–. To: Jack Robertson. Date: 7 May 2004
Hi Jack,
Many thanks for your enquiry. Unfortunately the only comment I’m able to provide is: “As this is an ongoing investigation, it would be inappropriate to make any comment about the enquiries being conducted or provide any other information relating to this investigation”.
Kind Regards
Ms K—–, AFP
***
5. JACK AND THE YANKS
From: Jack Robertson. To: His Excellency Mr J.T. (Tom) Scheiffer, Ambassador of the USA to Australia. Date: 4 May 2004. Attention: Press Officer(s), US Embassy Canberra
Your Excellency,
I write a Meeja Watch column for Margo Kingston’s SMH online Web Diary. I’m currently preparing a story for the website regarding the alleged leak of a Top Secret Office of National Assessments (ONA) intelligence analysis in mid 2003 to Melbourne journalist Andrew Bolt, who allegedly referred to classified information it contained in a Sun-Herald article of 23 June 2003. My story relates to new allegations that have been made to me on record, which may have some bearing on the circumstances and nature of the alleged leak, and which I intend to publish on Ms Kingston’s website this week.
Your Excellency, I understand that as this matter is the subject of an on-going Australian Federal Police domestic investigation the American government may prefer not to comment specifically on it. Never-the-less, since the alleged leak may be of some importance with regard to the on-going security and intelligence relationship between the United States and Australia, I respectfully submit the following questions and would be warmly grateful for any response Your Excellency is able to provide.
1. I understand that under the terms of the ANZUS alliance, American and Australian intelligence agencies routinely ‘share’ sensitive information, and that as such, it is possible that the alleged leak of the ONA report represents a potential security breach not only for Australian intelligence agencies but for those of the United States as well.
Question: a) does the American government view with concern the alleged leaking of the ONA report into the Australian public domain last year, and b) if so did the American government formally convey that concern to the Australian government last year when the leak first came to light?
2. Last week the Australian Opposition spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Mr Kevin Rudd reportedly (Sun-Herald, 2 May) wrote formally to the Australian Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock expressing his concern over the apparent lack of progress the AFP is making in the investigation of this alleged leak.
Question: Again given the on-going nature of the ANZUS alliance intelligence-sharing arrangement, does the American government share Mr Rudd’s concern at this apparent lack of progress?
3. Can the American government assure the Australian people that a failure of the AFP investigation to trace and prosecute to the full extent of Australian domestic law the person or persons responsible for this alleged leak will in no way have any future detrimental impact on the breadth, scope, timeliness and security classification of that sensitive information currently made available by American agencies to Australian agencies under the terms of the ANZUS alliance, and particularly any such future information relating to potential terrorist threats on Australian soil or against Australians citizens overseas?
Your Excellency, with warm thanks for your time and expressions of ANZUS goodwill to your nation’s soldiers currently serving alongside ours in Iraq.
Jack Robertson
***
Webdiarists NB: I�ve decided not to publish Wilkie�s information just yet, even though the AFP were not even prepared to advise me of whether or not this would actually compromise their investigation. (This is supposedly why the Senate Estimates Committee didn�t press ONA boss Peter Varghese on the ID of the report recipient in February this year; it�s now nearly four months later, and you�ve got to start to wonder at what point we�re going to be allowed to know.)
Wilkie will publish his claim fully himself in his forthcoming book Axis of Deceit (PanMacmillan, June/July) – so keep in mind when he does that the Prime Minister�s office, the Foreign Minister�s office, ONA, the Attorney-General and Mr Kevin Rudd, and the Australian Federal Police will have ALL known of that information since at least May. (In the case of ONA, they�ll have known all along of course, and as for the PM and Mr Downer, I find it impossible to believe that the ONA internal record wasn�t one of the first places they checked way back in late June 2003, when Bolt�s article appeared.)
So when the �mainstream press� Canberra pundits express their �shock and horror!� at Wilkie�s next revelation (and when Mr Howard and Mr Downer say: �Oh, but I wasn�t told!� yet again), direct everyone in the Canberra Bubble to this website, and ask senior media leaders like Kelly, Shanahan, Grattan and O�Brien WHY none of them kept at this AFP investigation story long enough to elicit the information all by themselves, way back in September 2003 when the �SCANDAL!!!� first broke.
This is what Knightley means when he says: “It was big news and now it�s tapered off and disappearing. Newspapers lose interest…”
But perhaps that�s not quite the whole story here, either. Oh dear, here I go getting all Loony-Lefty conspiratorial again. Then again., as Margo wrote earlier, pretty much anything is possible in these crazy days.
***
One Letter to the Future � Mr Glenn Milne�s Curious Reminiscences
Dear Australian Mainstream Press, circa tomorrow, next week, some time soon (I hope),
On 29 September 2003, one of your senior leaders – Glenn Milne, political writer for The Australian(and until recently Channel Seven) – wrote a very curious Op Ed piece on Tasmanian Governor Richard Butler. I�ll reprint the relevant Wilkie bits here (unfortunately it�s not archived online anywhere free):
*
Canberra ready to open the door on Richard Butler�s Past
JIM Bacon has a problem coming down the line he probably doesn’t even know about yet.
The Tasmanian Labor Premier’s decision to appoint one of the ALP’s favoured sons, former chief UN weapons inspector Richard Butler, as governor of the island state was always fraught. How fraught, Bacon may be about to find out. According to senior federal Government sources, Butler is now the subject of a series of freedom of information inquiries from media organisations (including The Australian) regarding his behaviour during his often controversial career in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The department will, of course, comply strictly with the terms of the relevant act in deciding which documents to release. But such decisions are always informed by the attitude of the government of the day to such FOI requests. And this government is of a mind to have as much information on Butler as it can in the public domain …
The third factor counting against him in Canberra is that many officials in DFAT believe Butler was afforded special protection and preferment during his time in the department, largely under the Hawke-Keating Labor governments. As well as being Gough Whitlam’s former principal private secretary, he was also married, at one stage, to Hawke’s education minister Susan Ryan. His son’s second name is Gough. The Government’s stance has also hardened in the wake of Opposition demands for police action against the leaker of the so-called �Wilkie memo�.
This concerns Andrew Wilkie, the Office of National Assessments’ analyst who resigned in a blaze of publicity claiming Howard was joining the invasion of Iraq under false pretences. A memo Wilkie wrote on Iraq was subsequently leaked to conservative Melbourne columnist Andrew Bolt who openly referred to the top-secret document in his Herald Sun column. A police investigation, egged on enthusiastically by the Opposition, is under way. Clearly, Labor believes the source of the leak will be found in the offices of either Howard or Foreign Minister Alexander Downer. The Opposition, however, was calling for no such investigation when, in 1999, then foreign affairs spokesman Laurie Brereton was leaked a Defence Intelligence Organisation briefing that revealed the Indonesian military was collaborating with pro-Jakarta militia in East Timor …
In short, neither Downer nor some elements of DFAT are well disposed to Labor on questions of principle. And this is at a time when they are considering the FOI requests regarding Butler’s behaviour.
The FOI requests are understood to relate to two particular episodes in Butler’s career, which prospered after a period in the doldrums with his appointment by then foreign minister Bill Hayden as ambassador for disarmament. While in that position, Opposition MPs demanded the government table the cost of the post. It turned out the then Labor government was spending almost $800,000 a year maintaining Butler in Geneva, including domestic servants costing $1800 a week. The embarrassing revelations helped ensure the post was scrapped only five years after it was established. In total, Butler and his support staff cost the taxpayer millions of dollars. There are many within DFAT who have always darkly hinted there was much more information available regarding Butler’s expenses, if only you knew where to look.
The second area subject to FOI requests is believed to be Butler’s term as ambassador to Thailand. This is, potentially, a much more damaging period. While there Butler faced allegations of sexual harassment…
Time to ask some more awkward amateur questions. This time of the �mainstream� press:
1. How are those News Limited Freedom of Information requests going, Glenn Milne (or Dennis Shanahan or Paul Kelly or Michael Stutchbury or any other senior News Limited journalist)? Do you Murdochians plan to tell us about Butler�s �dark� past any time soon?
2. Or were you only hinting at those FOI requests, Glenn, as part of a �friendly message delivery service� on behalf of some government player inside the Canberra Bubble, who�s a bit worried about being done for busting the Crimes Act?
3. Is this why the Bolt leak is running dead as a story, senior members of the Australian Press Gallery? Is it that you and all the most senior politicians in Canberra on both sides know that there�s been so many skeletons dumped in so many closets across the last two decades of incestuous games, covers-up, back-scratching, leaks and inside dealings that nobody wants to set the house of cards tumbling?
4. Is it true that ever since some of you senior journalists helped Bob Hawke knife Bill Hayden way back in 1983, those incestuous games have been growing gamier in smell? Is that why none of you want the Bolt leaker to get �done�? Because then the Brereton leaker would get �done�, too, and then maybe Butler would get �done�, and he�d take half of Keating and Hawke�s Cabinets down with him, too – including dear old Richo, who of course is in a bit of strife elsewhere just now, too, and he knows where just about every skeleton in Australia is closeted? Including those that might rattle all you �senior political correspondents� right to the professional eyeballs? Is all that about right? Or close, Glenn? Were you simply warning Labor (and everyone else who�s anyone in Canberra) off the story on behalf of your government sources and contacts?
No? Just me being conspiratorial again? Fine. Then let�s hear all about Governor Butler�s �dark� past in your very next column please, Glenn Milne. What was that about Thailand again? What was that about all those FOI requests, Rupert?
Come on, then. We�re waiting. (We�re VERY �publicly interested� in Governor Butler�s past). Oh, and let�s also have someone senior and influential in the Press Gallery � Malcolm Farr say, since he�s not terribly busy just now, apparently – pick up the phone tomorrow, next week, some time soon in your collective journalistic future – and impolitely ask Mr Howard, Mr Downer, Mr Varghese, AFP Commissioner Mick Keelty, Attorney General Ruddock and Kevin Rudd, MP, when we, the Australian public who pay them all, can expect to hear a PUBLIC progress report on the Bolt leak investigation that is a little more information-rich than: �Since this is an on-going investigation, it is inappropriate to comment at this stage.�
It�s almost a year now since someone inside the Canberra Bubble smashed the Crimes Act and breached national security at exactly a time when my little brother was on a battlefield getting shot at in the name of �national security�. That person was almost certainly the authorised recipient (or someone acting as proxy middleman for them) who asked for and received a copy of Wilkie�s report just a few days before 23 June. An �authorised� recipient means a senior government, military or public service official with a TOP SECRET, AUSTEO security clearance, and I�m sorry, but there just ain�t that many who fit the bill if you can narrow down what part of the Canberra Bubble they work in.
That person�s name is also written down on a piece of official paper inside ONA.
So I now want to know who that person was, Australian Press Gallery. The AFP has had a bloody year to investigate, and I�m fed up with waiting for a progress report. I want to know who asked ONA for that single copy. I want to know why they needed a six-month out-of-date, pre-invasion report in late June 2003. I want you � the �free� press – to find out who then leaked it to Andrew Bolt, too.
Then I want someone�s head to roll. For once. I want our honourable military, public service and especially our intelligence professionals protected from security breaches, political exploitation, buck-passing, can-carrying and general anti-democratic abuses of this Canberra Bubble game-playing kind. How about you, Glenn Milne? You�re the one who seems to know which Manuka swillhouse dunnies the gobbier Deep Throats hang about in these days.
It�s decision time, Australian Mainstream Press. At Webdiary we media nobodies have been bashing out heads against your Canberra Bubble for four long years, and often over mouse poo like phone cards and budget leaks and polly perk rip-offs – but this time our weak leaders got us drawn into an involvement in an illegal, immoral, unnecessary and possibly unwinnable �war� that you could well have helped us (and them) avoid if you�d only done your jobs properly. You all need to stop excusing your professional inadequacies and failures with ironic chatter and knowing Boomer sophistication, and start doing something about them.
So I�ll end my latest open letter appeal by asking the senior, more cynical among you � who just might remember such late colleagues from your own idealistic youths � a question I first posed way back in November 2000:
I urge you all to think about Greg Shackleton�s last report from Balibo at least once every day of your increasingly-complex working lives. My heart swells with pride at being a Human Being every time I watch it. As a Reporter, where do you stand in relation to it?
Yours sincerely,
Webdiary Meeja Watch