Media Watch Dog just loves it when ABC journalists interview their bosses – ie ABC managers.
● ABC JOURNOS TALK TO ABC MANAGING DIRECTOR ABOUT THE ABC – BUT DON’T FOCUS ON AUDIENCE DECLINE
Media Watch Dog just loves it when ABC journalists interview their bosses – ie ABC managers.
And so it came to pass on August 22 and August 23 (which, by the way, is the anniversary of the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939 which the left in Australia supported) that many an ABC journalist interviewed ABC managing director David Anderson. This followed the announcement that he would retire from the taxpayer funded public broadcaster by early next year.
Ellie’s (male) co-owner’s faves from this process were as follows. Mr Anderson told an accepting ABC TV News Breakfast team on August 23 that ABC Radio was doing well except for what he called, er, “audience decline”. Later on, David Anderson was asked as to whether he warranted the news coverage his resignation received in The Australian. Let’s go to the transcript:
David Anderson: So I tend to accept that they [The Australian] run what they run. I think there’s a photo of me on the front page today as I was heading out the driveway, going out to Parramatta for an interview with Richard Glover. They believe that’s interesting. That’s fine.
It would seem that David Anderson believes he does not warrant such coverage. Strange, then, that the managing director said he was not worth such media – while talking on the ABC TV’s News Breakfast before heading off for an interview with Patricia Karvelas on ABC Radio National Breakfast to talk about himself.
MORE NEWS OF THE SELDOM REPORTED STORY OF HISTORICAL CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IN GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS OVER THE DECADES
The Australian carried an important column on August 23 by Jack the Insider titled “No money can make up for the pedophile evil in the state school system”.
As Media Watch Dog readers are aware, the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse – headed by Peter McClellan KC – did not do any case studies into pedophilia within government schools. Not one. Moreover, Mr McClellan and his fellow commissioners did not approach any state Department of Education officials to ascertain how child sexual abuse was handled over the years. Nor did the royal commission request access to any files that might be in the possession of state education departments.
This is how Jack the Insider’s column commenced:
The Victorian government is facing a compensation bill of hundreds of millions of dollars over historical child sex offending by pedophile teachers active within the state’s education department. Some were primary school teachers, others offended against children in high schools. The department had no policy on how to manage pedophile teachers and when complaints grew, school principals and district inspectors would contrive a solution, often with the knowledge of senior department officials. Pedophile teachers were quietly moved on to new schools, more often than not into regional and rural areas, and on to unsuspecting children ….
The behaviour of the Victorian Education Department was no different to that of the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church or any other institution engaged in teaching children. One wonders, too, what the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was doing and how these cases were not examined in public hearings.
In Victoria, the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne first set up The Melbourne Response in late 1996 to handle complaints of child sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, including schools. The Victorian Department of Education first set up an inquiry into child sexual abuse in government schools in late 2023. Over two decades later.
Jack the Insider raised the important point as to why Peter McClellan KC’s royal commission did not undertake public hearings into child sexual abuse by adults in government schools. The ABC was heavily involved in reporting child sexual abuse in Catholic and Anglican schools. But it has not queried the royal commission’s failure with respect to government schools. And has not made full use of reports by its journalist Russell Jackson on this issue. Jack the Insider’s account might lead to a more thorough investigation. Maybe Four Corners will do a program on the issue. But don’t hold your breath – as the cliché goes.
CAN YOU BEAR IT?
● JAMAIS! NINE’S PETER FITZSIMONS AND HIS NON-INTERVIEW INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT MACRON
There was enormous interest in the last issue of Media Watch Dog – which focused on Nine Newspapers’ Peter FitzSimons’ reports from the Paris Olympics about the breakdancing performance of Rachael (“Please call me Raygun”) Gunn. The Red Bandannaed One – who played Rugby Union for Australia – reckoned that the performance of Dr Gunn (for a doctor she is) was “excellent”. Despite scoring three ducks in a row in the judging department. MWD made the point that Fitz would not have regarded similar levels of performance at Rugby as excellent. But there you go.
The Thought of Fitz from Paris did not just focus on Breaking (ie Breakdancing). It also involved a visit to the Élysée Palace. Here’s Fitz’s post on 23 July:
To shamelessly name-drop for moment, just had a couple of minutes chatting to President @EmmanuelMacron at Elysee Palace. (Reception for journalists.) I wanted to talk submarines & Kamala. He wanted to talk Serge Blanco, and rugby! Report to come in @SMH. Very gracious President.
— Peter FitzSimons (@Peter_Fitz) July 22, 2024
So, there you have it. Fitz advised his X followers – if followers there were – that he had “a couple of minutes chatting to President Emmanuel Macron at Élysée Palace” and that a report on the discussion would soon follow in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Then, on July 27, a “report” appeared in Peter FitzSimons’ “The Fitz Files” in the Sydney Morning Herald – under the heading, “Je ne regrette rien: How I scored an interview with French President Emmanuel Macron”. Here’s how it commenced:
Well I never. I mean it. Jamais! Last Monday, TFF [The Fitz Files] cracked an invite to the Elysee Palace to attend a reception hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron to welcome visiting journalists for the Olympics. Beneath the sparkling chandeliers, as we waited for his grand arrival, I was one of 300 or so journos hoovering up the world-class hors d’oeuvres. (I won Gold. The Japanese, South Koreans and Chileans were in absolute awe of me. They don’t call me “Peter Hoover-Hands” for nothing. In this – alas, still – demonstration sport, I drained a large tray in 16.76 seconds, for an unofficial Olympics Record.) …
Peter FitzSimons (aka Hoover-Hands) went on to describe how President Macron entered the room at the Élysée Palace “with no little elan” and proceeded to deliver a “warm and witty speech”. He continued:
At speech’s end, we clapped and he moved along behind a golden rope to shake hands with the crush. And yes, there was a gaggle of those same diminutive South Korean and Japanese journos in front of me. But as this was a different discipline, Hoover-Hands changed tack and was able to use some [Rugby] mauling skills from long ago in such an insouciant manner – if I do say so myself – that Macron caught my eye, smiled, and asked: “Vous etes rugbyman?”
Fitz went on to write that he and the French president “conversed for 90 seconds” – which is somewhat short of a “couple of minutes” referred to in his X post. Then Fitz referred to an attempt he had made to hitch a ride with President George W. Bush when he visited Australia in 2006 but received a presidential knock-back. Quelle Surprise!
In his X post, Fitz promised to report on his “couple of minutes” (read a minute and a half) chat with President Macron in his “Fitz Files” column in the Sydney Morning Herald. But this is the entire chat as reported in TFF on 27 July:
Macron: Vous etes rugbyman? [Are you a rugby player?]
FitzSimons: Oui! … Ca serait possible, peut-etre, d’avoir un interview avec vous, pendant les Jeux? [Yes! … Would it be possible, perhaps, to have an interview with you during the Games?]
Comrade FitzSimons then reported that he had told Macron how popular he was in Australia due to his criticism of Scott Morrison – but there were no direct quotes. Fitz then told his readers that President Macron’s attaché de press gave her card to him with a view to arranging an interview with Macron at a later date. Fitz concluded his account as follows:
Loved him. The interview has been tentatively arranged towards the end of the Games …Watch this space.
Well, MWD has been watching Fitz’s “space” in the Sydney Morning Herald. However, at the time MWD went out, The Fitz Files had not carried the promised Fitz/Macron interview.
Could it be that the interview was cancelled? Possibly because staff at the Élysée Palace discovered that the very tall Mr Hoover-Hands FitzSimons had hoovered up all the hors d’oeuvres before rudely pushing the Japanese, South Korean and Chilean journalists out of the way? And here’s another question. Can You Bear It?
[Er no, now that you ask. And here’s one more question. Isn’t it time that Comrade FitzSimons attended one of Nancy’s Courtesy Classes? – especially since they cover many areas of etiquette as “How to consume hors d’oeuvres at a French palace” and “How to avoid pushing such journalists of colour out of the way in order to have a chat with a French president”. – MWD Editor.]
● SENATOR PAYMAN’S (MISLEADING) AUSTRALIAN STORY CLAIM THAT SHE IS RUNNING A SMALL BUSINESS
Media Watch Dog has always been of the view that the ABC is critical of both Coalition and Labor governments – but invariably from a left-wing perspective. The taxpayer-funded public broadcaster rarely if ever criticises the Labor Party from a politically conservative position – only from the left. And it rarely criticises the Greens or the teal independents from any position. With respect to the Liberal Party – it invariably is bagged by the ABC, except if it is led by someone like Malcolm Turnbull.
On Monday August 19, at 7.30am, ABC News ran a report that teal independent Kylea Tink intended to move a private member’s bill or something or other. This was followed by an interview with teal independent Zali Steggall who used the occasion to bag Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. And this was followed by a soft interview with teal independent Zoe Daniel on the gambling legislation. Then on Wednesday August 21 teal independent Kate Chaney was interviewed on RN Breakfast about the proposed parliamentary behaviour legislation. All this despite the fact that the teal independents have scant influence in the House of Representatives since the Albanese government has an absolute majority in the chamber.
On the evening of Monday August 19, ABC TV’s Australian Story ran a soft report on another independent – this time one who does have influence. Namely, Senator Fatima Payman – the independent senator for Western Australia who recently resigned from the Labor Party due to her opposition to the Albanese government’s policy on the Israel-Hamas war. Unlike the teals in the House of Representatives, the independents in the Senate enjoy a balance of power and their positions can matter.
Senator Payman, who proclaims her Muslim faith, was not confronted with any hard issues. Guests on Australian Story rarely do. For example, the plight of women in some Muslim-majority states like Afghanistan, where Payman was born, was not raised.
MWD was especially interested in the comment on Australian Story made by Senator Payman and her (newly appointed) staff member Glenn Druery. Here we go:
Fatima Payman: Today is the first day back in Parliament as an independent senator for Western Australia … It’s like running your own small business when you have to set up your own website, recruit your own team, make your own policy position on matters.
…
Glenn Druery to Senator Payman: You’ve come from a big corporation [ie the Labor Party]. You’re now self-employed.
What a load of tosh. Small businesses have to raise revenue. Senators (like Fatima Payman) and commonwealth parliamentary staffers (like Glenn Druery) receive salaries paid by the commonwealth government – ie taxpayers. In short, they are salaried employees. Moreover, all commonwealth parliamentarians are provided with an office in Parliament House as well as their electorates.
Yet Australian Story would have viewers believe that once Senator Payman quit the Labor Party she became a small business operator who somehow or other had to fend for herself. Misinformation to be sure – if not disinformation – which was not corrected by Australian Story producers (Olivia Rousset, Robyn Powell and Kirstin Murray). Which raises the question – Can You Bear It?
● THE SMH LETTERS PAGE: “ANTI-DUTTON. ALWAYS.”
Nine Newspapers’ The Age and Sydney Morning Herald proclaim every morning that they are “Independent. Always.”.
But not independent of a certain left-of-centre position, it would appear. Each Saturday it is the habit of the Sydney Morning Herald’s letters editor to opine about letters published the previous week. This is how Pat Stringa (the SMH’s letters editor) commenced her analysis of Saturday 17 August under the heading “Dutton on the nose over Gaza ban”:
“Peter Dutton’s latest contribution to world affairs is morally repugnant. Palestinian civilians seeking to escape death and dispossession should have the same rights to safety as anyone else. Any standard less than this is simple discrimination,” wrote Peter Bishop of Marayong. Very few of the hundreds of letters which flooded our inbox on this subject disagreed. Many, like Peter Gibson of Wentworthville, wrote that the opposition leader was “not fit to be a leader in this country”, and “his weaponising of vulnerable refugees” was the latest example of his “divisive strategies”. John Bailey of Canterbury recognised that there might be political advantage in opposing the Voice, and refugee visas for Palestinians, but “at their core, these positions show a lack of empathy”.
That was all, folks. The SMH received hundreds of letters concerning the Opposition Leader’s call for stricter security check on individuals applying to enter Australia from Gaza during the Israel-Hamas war. But “virtually” everyone who wrote to the SMH disagreed with the Liberal Party leader while “many” declared that Peter Dutton was not fit to be prime minister.
Since the current opinion polls are indicating that Labor and the Coalition have about the same level of support in Australia, it can be assumed that the Sydney Morning Herald has lost most of its politically conservative readers who bother to write letters to the newspapers. There was a time when the SMH had a lively and informed letters page.
Nine’s Australian Financial Review publishes a range of political views on its “Letters to the Editor” page. But the Sydney Morning Herald sees fit to boast that its correspondents come from the Labor Party/teals/Greens cohort. Hardly something to write-home-about (as the wartime saying goes) for a paper which boasts of being “Independent. Always.”. Can You Bear It?
● CRIKEY’S PAUL KEATING SLEDGE-O-METER FORGETS HIS COCKER SPANIEL SLEDGE.
Media Watch Dog is a dedicated follower of the Crikey newsletter. As avid readers know, Eric Beecher is the chairman and co-founder of Private Media – the publisher of Crikey.
Ellie’s (male) co-owner is one of those Australian scribblers who has been both praised and condemned by Paul Keating, Australia’s 24th prime minister. And, in turn, Hendo has supported and criticised the former Labor Party leader.
No surprise, then, that MWD has followed “The Paul Keating sledge-o-meter” in Crikey. In particular, the “Warm lettuce to desiccated coconut: Paul Keating’s greatest hits ranked” piece published in Crikey on 14 August.
Some of your man Keating’s put-downs are very funny, especially in real life when timing is important. Others, however, are mere abuse. It’s fair to say that Charlie Lewis, Crikey’s “tips and murmurs” editor, has focused on the politically fashionable Keating put-downs of such Liberal Party leaders as John Howard and John Hewson. Rather than the unfashionable ones which have not lasted well with respect to changing fashions.
For example, Lewis has quoted PK’s reference to John Howard as a “pre-Copernican obscurantist” (whatever that might mean) – and John Hewson as “simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up”. The latter is funny – in MWD’s view.
But, according to MWD’s research, Crikey does not appear to have remembered some of Paul Keating’s put-downs which would not get a run in today’s media without a threat of the perpetrator being hauled up before the anti-discrimination beak.
For example, there was Paul Keating’s one-time reported position to same-sex marriage, namely: “Two blokes and a cocker spaniel doesn’t make a family.”
It’s interesting to note that, so far, it appears that Crikey has not chosen to remember this Keating irreverent comment of recent memory on its Paul Keating’s Sledge-o-Meter. Can You Bear It?
● HOW RUPERT MURDOCH “LURED” ERIC BEECHER – RATHER THAN OFFERED HIM A GREAT WELL-PAID JOB
While on the topic of Eric Beecher, MWD has just purchased a copy of his book The Men Who Killed The News (Scribner). Flipping through the introduction at Gin & Tonic Time on Friday 23 August, MWD noticed this:
When Rupert Murdoch lured me away from my job as editor of The Sydney Morning Herald, then arguably the best newspaper in Australia, I was thirty-six and loved being a serious journalist. It was 1987, Murdoch wasn’t the international ogre he later became (this was pre-phone-hacking, pre-Fox News), but like many journalists in the Anglosphere, I felt apprehensive about his editorial values, his voracious commerciality, and the methods he used to dispense power. I decided to accept his offer to become editor-in-chief of his Melbourne newspaper group because it was quite an exquisite challenge, or so I told myself, and because I didn’t lack ambition. Murdoch had just acquired Australia’s largest stable of newspapers, which included the Melbourne Herald, flagship of his father’s publishing empire ….
My flirtation with Murdoch lasted two years. I resigned when my moral compass became dysfunctional. He implored me to stay, telling me with uncharacteristic emotion as we sat together alone on a leather couch in his father’s old office, weeks before I finally quit, that he thought, “we’d be working together all our lives”. But I found myself incapable of navigating the ethical hurdles that litter the path of a Murdoch editor. Alas, I don’t know how to be suitably obsequious; he told me I was “aloof”.
How about that? Your man Beecher departed Fairfax when he was editor of the Sydney Morning Herald. How do we know that it was “arguably the best newspaper in Australia” at this time? Because Eric Beecher told us so, that’s how. Who would doubt this now?
Moreover, Comrade Beecher did not do too badly out of the deal. Presumably, he was “lured away” by Murdoch for reasonable “compensation” (as the Top End of Town likes to call it). And, since then, with the publication of The Men Who Killed The News, Mr Beecher was able to assuage his “moral compass”. It took a mere 400 pages. Can You Bear It?
[I note that the extract from Eric Beecher’s book, which ran in Eric Beecher’s Crikey, was headed “my flirtation with Murdoch only lasted two years before my moral compass became too dysfunctional”. Maybe I’m old-fashioned. But I would have thought that a two-year flirtation with anyone is a bit on the lengthy side. – MWD Editor.]
EDITORIAL
KIM WILLIAMS AND ABC BOARD NOW SET TO MAKE THE BOARD’S ONLY REALLY IMPORTANT DECISION
As Media Watch Dog has consistently maintained, the ABC board cannot, and should not, run the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster. That’s the role of the chief executive/managing director. The proper role of the ABC board is oversight – with respect to administration and to ensuring that the ABC abides by its Charter and the ABC Act.
The only really important role for the ABC board is the appointment of its managing director. David Anderson, the current managing director, announced his intended resignation on Thursday August 22 – it will probably take effect as late as April next year. He took up the position in May 2019 and, in 2023 when Ita Buttrose was ABC chair, had his five-year term extended to mid-2028. This was an early extension. It had the consequence of bringing about a situation whereby Ms Buttrose’s replacement (her term expired in March 2024) would not have a role in choosing the next ABC managing director until around 2028.
However, this was not to be. Kim Williams became ABC chair in February 2024 – and David Anderson will now retire in early 2025. This gives Williams and the current ABC board the chance to make the only important decision with respect to running the ABC on a day-to-day basis sometime between late 2024 and early 2025.
David Anderson is a pleasant guy. Moreover, he was a better managing director than his predecessors Michelle Guthrie, Mark Scott and Russell Balding. Scott was a weak managing director who was either unable or unwilling to prevail over the ABC staff collective – or soviet – which runs the public broadcaster. Mark Scott has since become a weak vice-chancellor at the University of Sydney.
As Gerard Henderson pointed out in his Weekend Australian column of August 10, Williams has made some valid criticisms of the ABC since his appointment as chair. Including a criticism of the weakness of ABC News, the lack of first-rate documentaries and arts programs and more besides. Most notably, Williams has criticised the ABC’s tendency to talk about itself. And he told Monica Attard’s Fourth Estate podcast on March 14: “If you don’t want to reflect a view that aspires to impartiality, don’t work for the ABC.”
These are all good signs. However, as yet, Williams has not addressed the fact that the ABC is a conservative-free zone which lacks viewpoint diversity. In other words, the ABC has no prominent conservative among the 5000 staff. And many ABC panels are occasions where everyone agrees with everyone else in a left-of-centre kind of way. Re which see today’s “An ABC Update” segment. The fact that, over recent years, the ABC lost many of its politically conservative viewers/listeners has contributed to its falling ratings. So far Mr Williams has stressed the need for ABC presenters to be impartial. But he has not addressed the lack of viewpoint diversity through the organisation. And the fact that some political conservatives have been “cancelled” by the ABC while others refuse to put themselves at the whim of hostile presenters and audiences.
Kim Williams will be judged by his results – now that he has the opportunity to appoint the next ABC managing director. We shall see. But until the chair addresses the ABC’s lack of viewpoint diversity there will be no real ABC reform.
It is worth noting that, in recent times, Mr Anderson has only referred to himself as the ABC “managing director”. He appears to have dropped the title which describes him as ABC “managing director and editor-in-chief”. It is not clear why. But MWD has not asked the ABC about this since the ABC’s communications department rarely communicates by answering such questions.
AN ABC UPDATE
THE ABC’S LACK OF VIEWPOINT DIVERSITY – A LATE NIGHT LIVE PANEL ON ARTISTS AND THE ISRAEL-GAZA WAR
Kim Williams, the ABC’s relatively new chair, wants the taxpayer funded public broadcaster to act in an impartial way. Fair enough. But that’s only part of the problem. It’s one thing to have presenters who act with impartiality. It’s quite another to ensure that the ABC exhibits viewpoint diversity.
Now, as Media Watch Dog consistently points out, it is executive producers at the ABC – not presenters – who are primarily responsible for deciding what “talent” will be invited to take part on ABC programs.
Take the ABC Radio National Late Night Live program (aka “Late Night Left”) which went to air for some 54 minutes on August 21. The title was “Should artists have the right to freedom of expression”. This is how the program was described by the executive producer Anna Whitfield:
Since the war in Gaza broke out there has been a crisis of censorship in the arts sector around the world, in what the not-for-profit group Freemuse is calling a most alarming moment for freedom of expression. Here in Australia pianist Jayson Gillham had his concerts cancelled after speaking about the killing of journalists in Gaza, and arts organisations have lost millions in funding from donors. So what rights do artists have to express political views? And what should the consequences be?
Guests: • Louise Adler, Adelaide Writers’ Week • Pianist, Jayson Gillham
• Actor, Violette Ayad • Sverre Pedersen, Executive Director, Freemuse, a not-for-profit group which produced the State of Artistic Freedom 2024 Report.
MWD just loves it when members of the intelligentsia go on the ABC and complain that they have been “silenced”. In any event, this was a blatant example of the ABC’s lack of viewpoint diversity.
The pianist Jayson Gillham defended his right to introduce a piece at a Melbourne Symphony Orchestra (MSO) concert with a condemnation of Israel’s response to Hamas’ attack on South Israel on October 7.
The other three members of the panel gave total support for Gillham. No other view was heard as – however, the quartet maintained that their views could not be heard.
Then Sverre Pedersen spoke about what he said was the censorship of artists in Germany, Britain and the United States.
Then Louise Adler declared that there has been a long history of silencing artists. She mentioned the 1937 edited collection Authors Takes Sides on the Spanish War – but failed to mention that the book was published by Funnell & Sons. In short, these authors were not silenced.
Comrade Adler claimed that what she called the Israel Lobby went to great lengths to block pro-Palestinian authors talking at the 2023 Adelaide Writers’ Week. She failed to mention – as documented in MWD – that the Adelaide Writers’ Week is a leftist stack. Yet Adler claimed that AWW presents “a range of opinions”. What a load of absolute tosh.
Then Violette Ayad, an Australian actor born to Palestinian and Lebanese parents, backed the recent anti-Israel protest at the Sydney Theatre Company (STC). She supported the actors who demonstrated their opposition to Israel.
Then Pedersen criticised the formation of the state of Israel. Then Comrade Adler declared that there is some comparison between the Sydney Opera House being lit with the Israel flag with artists expressing compassion and solidarity with the Palestinians. Overlooking the fact that no one pays money to look at lights on the Opera House – whereas individuals do pay to attend MSO and STC performances.
Then Adler did a rant against Israel. And then, Quelle Surprise!, the comrade called for more commonwealth funding for the arts in order to cover any loss of income from art-going patrons who do not wish to be lectured at by those who identify as artists.
And so it went on and on and zzzzzzzz. The lack of viewpoint diversity makes such occasions boring. For his part, Hendo went off for a Post-Post-Dinner Drink – after all, it was late. There’s only so much mutual agreement a canine co-owner can put up with.
DOCUMENTATION
VICTORIA POLICE MAINTAINS THAT HARSH COVID-19 LOCKDOWNS CONTRIBUTED TO CURRENT YOUTH CRIME – BUT THE ABC GOES SOFT ON COMMISSIONER SHANE PATTON
On August 20, ABC TV News Breakfast ran excerpts from an interview between Victoria Police chief commissioner Shane Patton and journalist Ben Knight. The latter was also the principal author of an article in ABC Online that very day titled “Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton investigates lockdown link to youth crime rise”.
Media Watch Dog readers will be well aware that Commissioner Patton played a key role in the prosecution of the late Cardinal George Pell for alleged historical child sexual abuse. Early on, he called a media conference to announce that 26 charges had been laid against Pell but provided no information. A media release would have done the job since Patton said virtually nothing and took no questions. But the high-profile announcement that 26 charges had been laid was damaging to Pell. In giving evidence before the Magistrates’ Court a senior Victoria Police inspector acknowledged that he could understand why some people might consider that Victoria Police was involved in a “Get Pell” campaign.
Later, Patton led a three-man team (yes, they were all men) to Rome where Pell agreed to be interviewed. As the transcript of the interview demonstrates, Victoria Police did an unprofessional job. The interviewers were ignorant of many matters – including the geography of the Ballarat region (where some alleged crimes were said to have taken place) along with practices of the Catholic Church and more besides.
In the event, none of the 26 charges laid by Victoria Police succeeded. They were either struck out at the Magistrates’ Court, dropped by Victoria Police, discontinued by the Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions or overturned by the High Court of Australia. But Victoria Police’s then chief commissioner – Graham Ashton – declared the investigation a success even after the High Court’s unanimous decision to quash the only charges that went to court.
When Ashton stepped down, Patton was promoted to a chief commissioner position from his role as Ashton’s deputy.
But MWD digresses. In his interview with Ben Knight, Shane Patton expressed considerable concern about the rise of youth crime in Victoria. This is what Knight wrote early in his report:
Victoria’s top cop has linked a rise in youth crime to a cultural shift he thinks could stem from pandemic lockdowns, which has seen young people go from “zero to 100” when it comes to offending. In a one-on-one interview with the ABC, Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton said there were more than 40 loosely-affiliated youth gangs, and police were targeting hundreds of young offenders. “We arrest a lot of those young offenders, there are around 600 gang members that we’re chasing down.” He said there is a “core group” that is “really testing us”.
Sounds very serious. And it is. But what interested MWD in particular was Commissioner Patton’s explanation for the explosion in violent youth offending. Let’s go back to Knight’s report:
In the years since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, the police chief said there had been a “marked escalation” with younger people “committing high-end crimes”. Commissioner Patton said he does not “have the answers” as to what was causing the rise, but Victoria Police was “looking at everything”, including the impact of the pandemic and lockdowns.
“In a sense, missing those formative years, where you might have been in year 9, 10, or 11, where we know it’s really important, where young children can go off the rails, what difference that’s made.” While he believed COVID-19 lockdowns have contributed, he conceded “what the extent is, we don’t really know. We weren’t seeing that as frequently as we are now, we weren’t seeing all of the younger children offending that we are now. Intuitively, it says there’s some connection there”.
Youth offending may not be the only crime affected by the pandemic and the lockdowns. “I think everything is more fragile after the pandemic years. Many people, irrespective of age, felt they had their lives stolen for two-and-a-half years,” Commissioner Patton said. “Any society — it’s not just Victorians and Australians — has had its social cohesion and unity tested as a result of that, and what the ramifications are from that, whether it’s meant a sense of entitlement, or people just focusing on themselves, I don’t know”.
Clearly, Victoria Police accepts no responsibility for the testing of “social cohesion” that occurred during the Covid-19 lockdowns – which were more severe in Victoria compared with the rest of Australia. Indeed, Victoria was perhaps the most locked down place in the Western world during the pandemic.
And who administered the lockdown? Why, Victoria Police. It was under the watch of the Victoria Police commissioner that Victoria Police arrested and handcuffed a young pregnant woman for having publicised an anti-lockdown protest on her Facebook page. The charge was later dropped. Then a member of Victoria Police was filmed violently throwing a man – who was being interviewed by other police – to the ground. Victoria Police charged and capsicum-sprayed protesters who were walking peacefully (albeit illegally) down a major road. And Victoria Police even used rubber bullets to disrupt anti-lockdown protesters. Many of the demonstrators were young.
There is no evidence that Commissioner Patton and his senior colleagues ever raised the long-term effect of the impact of the lockdowns on Victorian youth – who Patton now concedes “had their lives stolen for two and a half years” – with the Victorian government during the pandemic. Instead, Patton and his colleagues enforced the law, introduced by (then) Victorian premier Daniel Andrews and his Labor government, at times in a draconian manner.
The ABC in Victoria did not challenge Victoria Police’s (incompetent) behaviour in the Pell case. Nor did the ABC query the severity of the Victorian lockdowns or the behaviour of Victoria Police in enforcing the lockdowns.
And now Commissioner Patton is talking to the ABC and blaming the severity of the lockdowns for the surge of youth crime. Did ABC senior reporter Ben Knight ask Victoria Police’s commissioner as to whether he took any responsibility for the effect of the lockdowns enforced by the police force on the mental health of young Victorians? Not on your Nelly – as the saying goes.
More Coverage
Gloomsters, listen up – the people are speaking out
Australians are proud of their country, proud of how it has evolved into one of the world’s most prosperous, fair and free societies. That’s something mighty to celebrate.
On Covid, CIA finally makes the only logical call
The agency’s assessment that Covid likely originated in a lab won’t surprise anyone who has closely followed this topic. Joe Biden’s pre-emptive pardon for Anthony Fauci should enrage every family who lost a loved one to Covid-19.