Katharine Murphy, deputy political editor
theguardian.com, Thursday 23 January 2014
Thunderous outrage ensues when the only way of getting answers to important questions is to actually air the allegations
An Indonesian doctor examines an asylum seeker's injuries. Photograph: ABC TV
OK, so here’s the thing. When you sanction public policy being executed in a propaganda-rich, fact-free zone, perverse things do start happening. Every contention starts to equal every other contention, and facts? Even when they can be established, which is not all that often, they don’t seem to stick.
I’m referring here of course to the culture of secrecy and obfuscation surrounding the “Operation Sovereign Borders” policy of the Abbott government. The current furore over whether or not the Australian navy subjected would-be asylum seekers to harsh treatment gives us a helpful moment to take a breath, and reflect.
The ABC’s Indonesia correspondent, George Roberts, is taking flak for doing his job – attempting to find out what might or might not be happening on the seas to our north. This is a necessary exercise even under a regime of routine disclosure. Reporters should always, where possible, reality check “facts” they are given rather than be state-sanctioned stenographers.
It is doubly necessary in an environment where it is apparently government policy not to disclose basic facts to the voters who pay substantial amounts annually for border protection operations through their taxes. Roberts, funnily enough, also has an obligation to the taxpayer to do his job to the best of his ability – they pay his salary as well.
In any normal environment, the allegations aired by the ABC would prompt an orderly process where the claims could be put and answered. But having thrown out this most basic of public interest transactions in the quest to keep everything deemed operational under wraps, everything in this space is slightly off balance.
Reporters, declining to accept the terms of engagement for obvious public interest reasons, push harder for information. There’s often no reliable way of determining veracity. Then thunderous outrage ensues when the only way of getting answers to important questions is to actually air the allegations.
The latest round of the blame game has triggered an outburst of “team navy” from team Abbott, and a less than subtle hint to the ABC to play a political game, and keep itself nice.
Well, let’s try and cut through for a minute.
Reporters have an obligation to get things right. You would not find me arguing otherwise. I don’t know if the latest allegations are correct, or not. But fact is, right now, the government is responding to a normal accountability dynamic by projecting its crusade and conflict culture onto everyone else. Everyone is styled as a combatant whether they are, or whether they are not.
It’s unclear whether this is being done for basic damage control, or because of hard wired ideological preoccupations – but as a consequence of swaggering “us or them”, we are all wedged inside some post modern, post-truth pantomime.
And the roiling contention culture is actually hurting the government in a very basic sense. The boats are stopping. But in an environment with so much posturing, with so much “he said she said” that simple fact cannot pierce the daily clutter. Ray Hadley is doing his best, but I don’t think the government has quite got the clean run it wanted.
Scott Morrison is correct to point out that having seen some masterful agitprop from Canberra in recent years, people smugglers and would be asylum seekers are no doubt intent on giving it back to try and counter the policy step change imposed first by Labor with the PNG solution, and subsequently by Abbott with Operation Sovereign Borders.
And the reflexive outbreak of “team navy” and “how dare anyone question our fine men on the high seas”, could be perfectly fine of course if (as Michelle Grattan points out in The Conversation today) we hadn’t recently stumbled accidentally into Indonesian territorial waters despite assurances that we hadn’t, and wouldn’t ... or if we apply brain bleach to forget previous incidents where either defence or immigration or customs have made mistakes or mis-steps ... being: 1. Large organisations where sometimes the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing, and 2. Well, human.
Rear Admiral Ray Griggs for his part made the following statement on Wednesday concerning the allegations. “Based on everything I know there is no basis to these allegations – none.” Translation: more than likely, this didn’t happen, I’m almost certain it didn’t – but given the capacity for unpleasant surprise, let’s leave a little bit of grey area.
The government might be well placed – just as a point of principle, and as an investment in self-preservation over the long haul – to listen to that tiny note of caution.
