Extract from The Guardian
The perception of the ABC’s independence has been shattered. Radical new measures will be needed to repair the broken trust
Following
the revelations that Justin Milne, who resigned as ABC chairman on
Thursday, ordered the sacking of an ABC journalist, the prime minister
made an important declaration. He said the ABC’s independence was
important to him and his government. He went on to say that it was
important that the ABC’s independence be maintained.
But the crisis now engulfing the ABC and its board means words are no longer enough. The perception of the ABC’s independence has been shattered. For ABC staff, journalists and the public, new measures will be needed to repair the broken trust and restore confidence that our national broadcaster is truly free of political interference.
The ABC board carries the ultimate responsibility for safeguarding the independence and integrity of the national broadcaster. In previous eras, both sides of politics have made inappropriate partisan appointments to the ABC board, but the current fiasco is a more serious assault on board independence than we have seen before.
In 2013, communications minister Stephen Conroy pushed through sensible reforms to ensure board appointments were merit-based and at arm’s length from government. An independent panel from the department was tasked to make recommendations before the minister made board appointments.
Despite this, the appointment process has again become deeply politicised and basic governance standards have been breached. The appointment panel has been bypassed; appointees have instead been directly recommended by the minister, with the exception of the staff-elected Jane Connors. Even requirements to have the minister’s reasons published when not taking the department’s recommendations have breached if not the letter, then certainly the spirit of the law.
A report from The Australia Institute, No Politics at Aunty’s Table, came up with a number of specific measures to address the issue, including that:
Ostensibly, the ABC is funded on a three-year cycle, giving management crucial predictability in funding, and therefore a greater ability to plan. This system of funding was introduced 30 years ago but has recently become unsteady and is no longer adhered to. The 2014 budget and Myefo cuts to the ABC budget were the most dramatic example, and the 2018 budget cuts have only made things worse.
Again, specific recommendations for how this could work: the communications department should, when the end of each triennium approaches, call for public submissions regarding ABC funding. When submissions are made, the communications department could hold physical and digital forums to examine the submissions and their implications. These should be held in a range of locations, including rural and regional locations. At the end of the consultation process, the communications department should publish a report summarising the debate.
Another measure to strengthen a public broadcaster’s position in other countries has been to include reference to public media in the constitution. In Australia, the intent of such a measure would be to prevent fundamental changes being made to the ABC by a hostile government.
And while the idea seems radical, Australia Institute research shows the idea of enshrining the ABC in the constitution has broad popular support. In 2015, polling showed an overall majority (54%) of Australians supported, or strongly supported enshrining the ABC in the constitution to help protect it from political interference, with only 15% opposing or strongly opposing.
In an era of fake news, digital disruption, and traditional business models of journalism under pressure, public broadcasting is more important than ever.
Indeed, with the current loss of faith in politics leading to a decline in trust in our democracy, it is not too grandiose to suggest that a strong, independent, trusted ABC is the glue that can help prevent the further fraying of our democratic system itself.
• Ben Oquist is executive director of The Australia Institut
But the crisis now engulfing the ABC and its board means words are no longer enough. The perception of the ABC’s independence has been shattered. For ABC staff, journalists and the public, new measures will be needed to repair the broken trust and restore confidence that our national broadcaster is truly free of political interference.
The ABC board carries the ultimate responsibility for safeguarding the independence and integrity of the national broadcaster. In previous eras, both sides of politics have made inappropriate partisan appointments to the ABC board, but the current fiasco is a more serious assault on board independence than we have seen before.
In 2013, communications minister Stephen Conroy pushed through sensible reforms to ensure board appointments were merit-based and at arm’s length from government. An independent panel from the department was tasked to make recommendations before the minister made board appointments.
Despite this, the appointment process has again become deeply politicised and basic governance standards have been breached. The appointment panel has been bypassed; appointees have instead been directly recommended by the minister, with the exception of the staff-elected Jane Connors. Even requirements to have the minister’s reasons published when not taking the department’s recommendations have breached if not the letter, then certainly the spirit of the law.
A report from The Australia Institute, No Politics at Aunty’s Table, came up with a number of specific measures to address the issue, including that:
- A cross-party committee be given responsibility for overseeing the ABC board appointment process, either replacing the current nomination panel, or overseeing it;
- ABC audiences and the wider public to be more involved, with better publicity around upcoming board vacancies and selection criteria.
- Selection of an “audience supported board member” with a public nomination and selection process
- The option for the minister to bypass the nomination process should be removed, or available only with consultation with the shadow minister.
Ostensibly, the ABC is funded on a three-year cycle, giving management crucial predictability in funding, and therefore a greater ability to plan. This system of funding was introduced 30 years ago but has recently become unsteady and is no longer adhered to. The 2014 budget and Myefo cuts to the ABC budget were the most dramatic example, and the 2018 budget cuts have only made things worse.
Again, specific recommendations for how this could work: the communications department should, when the end of each triennium approaches, call for public submissions regarding ABC funding. When submissions are made, the communications department could hold physical and digital forums to examine the submissions and their implications. These should be held in a range of locations, including rural and regional locations. At the end of the consultation process, the communications department should publish a report summarising the debate.
Another measure to strengthen a public broadcaster’s position in other countries has been to include reference to public media in the constitution. In Australia, the intent of such a measure would be to prevent fundamental changes being made to the ABC by a hostile government.
And while the idea seems radical, Australia Institute research shows the idea of enshrining the ABC in the constitution has broad popular support. In 2015, polling showed an overall majority (54%) of Australians supported, or strongly supported enshrining the ABC in the constitution to help protect it from political interference, with only 15% opposing or strongly opposing.
In an era of fake news, digital disruption, and traditional business models of journalism under pressure, public broadcasting is more important than ever.
Indeed, with the current loss of faith in politics leading to a decline in trust in our democracy, it is not too grandiose to suggest that a strong, independent, trusted ABC is the glue that can help prevent the further fraying of our democratic system itself.
• Ben Oquist is executive director of The Australia Institut
No comments:
Post a Comment