The ABC went after and won a $233M contract to operate the Australia Network, Australia's overseas television service.   The spirit of the deal requires the ABC to promote our national interests.   If it can't bring itself to stick to the deal, then it shouldn't take the money.

The ABC can't have it both ways.  

The Australian newspaper has an important editorial today about the ABC's "double dealing" on the projection of our national interest.   It's in the the very nature of the national interest that our security services and their operations are kept secret.   That's why their stuff has Top Secret on the top.

ABC working against spirit of contract

THE hypocrisy of many of the green Left's arguments over the Indonesian spying allegations is matched by the perfidy that characterises the involvement of the ABC.

When this organisation was given responsibility for running the federal government's $223 million television service for Asia, it came with strings attached. At the time, this was barely recognised. But after it broadcast material that damaged relations with Indonesia, the implications of running the Australia Network have left the ABC looking like an expert in double-dealing.

The Australia Network means the ABC has a duty to foster the national interest in Asia. The Guardian and other commercial media outlets have no such duty. So when the ABC acts in a way that harms Australia it will inevitably be called to account.

Mark Scott gave evidence to the Senate Estimates Committee this week.

When it suits the ABC - like taking the Q and A program to Jakarta or to India as it did this week - the test it applies is whether travelling and spending the money promotes the national interest:

(Taking Q and A overseas) ..... was an important part of our international broadcasting strategy. We are working with DFAT on this. India is clearly a very important market......  it's (also) why we did Q&A from Jakarta. That is why we did it from India. That is why we are keen to do one from China. It was a good investment in public diplomacy on behalf of Australia.

But on the spying story - it's an entirely different test.   The National Interest doesn't matter, it's the Public Interest. This from Mark Scott at the same senate estimates hearing this Tuesday.

The test we apply is whether releasing material is in the public interest. At times some people talk about 'the national interest' rather than talking about 'the public interest'.Yes, I appreciate that the release of some of this material might be embarrassing and that the release of some of this material may cause some difficulties in the Australia-Indonesia relationship in the short term.But I think we would say that that reporting was absolutely in the public interest...and probably in the national interest in the long term.

From the day that Mark Scott took on the Australia Network responsibilities for the ABC, the question of whether or not to advance Australia's national interest ceased to be an optional extra.

It's worthwhile revisiting the history of the Australia Network tender debacle.

Kevin Rudd as Foreign Minister put the contract to tender in late 2010.   Under his tender process the tender decision would be made within his department - not involving the cabinet, the PM or the communications minister Stephen Conroy.   His department had informally tipped the Sky News operation to win the deal.

Julia Gillard did not like that.   The tender process was revised by mid 2011, and it was ultimately completely cancelled in December 2011 with the contract being given to the ABC in perpetuity.

Here are a few steps along the way.

This Media Release issued late June 2011 jointly by PM Gillard, Foreign Minister Rudd and Communications Minister Stephen Conroy sets out the expectations of the Australia Network operator and reasons that the original tender process (that had recommended the network contract to Sky TV) was amended - more emphasis on promoting the National Interest.

This contractual amendment advising tenderers of the requirement for more emphasis on advancing the Australian National Interest was issued in July 2011.  

In part the contractual documents called for tenderers:

to specifically address how their operation of the Australia Network service would meet Australia's national interests ..........for a service that will support Australia's national interests and meet the Commonwealth Objectives.... required the Australia Network service provider to promote a positive image of Australia.... the Government has decided that its national interests should be addressed more broadly.

Here's some of the history.

Media talking points from the DFAT June 2011.   Includes Mark Scott from the ABC acknowledging importance of diplomacy role.

Heavily redacted FOI released letter from Kevin Rudd (Foreign Minister) to Julia Gillard (PM) setting out the decision of the DFAT tender team - note no cabinet involvement in decision (Rudd didn't date it, received 5 June 2011 by the PM)

Late June 2011 - toing and froing between PM Gillard, Rudd and Conroy's departments to get the joint press release as above approved - it reinforces the importance of new tender selection criterion advancing the national interest.   Notes decision will now go to Cabinet.

PM Gillard's department reported apparent "unauthorised disclosures" of the tender deliberations to the AFP Commissioner Tony Negus and asked for an investigation.   It led nowhere but there are some interesting media reports from the time.  Starts 27 October 2011.

December 5 2011 Julia Gillard and the Cabinet endorse a decision to award the contract permanently to the ABC after scrapping the tender process on 7 November 2011.

The ABC has a hide signing up to the National Interest promoting provisions, taking the money - then setting out to demolish our standing with Indonesia.  

The ABC's Enterprise Agreement with its own staff makes a point of defining "improper conduct which brings, or is likely to bring, the ABC into disrepute" as the sort of misconduct that could terminate an employee's contract.   

Bring the ABC into disrepute - sack.   Do the same for Australia - Walkley.

You can't expect to keep your contract as an ad agency and still get paid to air the client's confidential dirty laundry.   I hope Sky News is getting their legal letters ready to fire.