Ita Buttrose hits back at Morrison government over ABC editorial independence

ABC Chair sends stinging letter to the federal government, accusing it of failing to respect editorial independence.

Ita Buttrose says her letter to Communications Minister Paul Fletcher demands to know whether his interference in the story represented a lack of respect for the ‘editorial independence of the ABC’. Picture: Matrix Media Group

Ita Buttrose has delivered a rebuke to the federal government over perceived “political interference” in the ABC’s editorial process in relation to last month’s controversial Four Corners program, further fracturing the relationship between the public broadcaster and the Coalition.

The strongly worded letter, sent by the ABC chairwoman to Communications Minister Paul Fletcher on Monday, says the government’s bid to kill the story in the hours before it was due to air was inappropriate, and the minister’s list of questions about the program after it screened went “beyond normal inquiry”.

Ms Buttrose accused Mr Fletcher of “disrespect” for posting those questions on social media before sending them to her, as reported by The Australian on Monday.

The Four Corners episode, which aired on November 9, investigated alleged extramarital affairs and personal transgressions involving government ministers Alan Tudge and Christian Porter.

On December 1, Mr Fletcher posted on Twitter that he had written to Ms Buttrose, demanding answers to 15 questions relating to the show, including whether the ABC’s flagship current affairs program had been “fair and impartial”, if such an expose was “newsworthy”, and if it had “respected the privacy” of the politicians and woman involved, as required under the ABC Act.

It’s understood that in her reply Ms Buttrose rejected all 15 of the complaints made by Mr Fletcher and directly challenged some of the assertions in his letter as being factually incorrect.

Ms Buttrose accuses the Morrison government of behaviour that “smacks of political interference”. She concedes the ABC Act does require the board to demand fair, accurate and impartial reporting, but it also requires the board to “maintain the independence and integrity of the corporation”.

“This board takes both of these responsibilities most seriously,” the letter states.

“Politicians and their families certainly have a right to privacy,” she says, but adds that, as elected representatives, politicians are highly relevant “when considering the public interest”.

A spokesman for Mr Fletcher said: “The minister has received the chair’s correspondence. Any inquiries about the content of the letter, which the chair has marked as confidential, should be directed to the ABC.”

Mr Fletcher will “carefully consider” the letter from Ms Buttrose before deciding how — or if — he will reply.

Writing in The Australian today, Ian McGarrity, the former deputy to the head of ABC TV, said he was astounded by revelations during a Senate estimates hearing on the day the Four Corners program aired that Ms Buttrose had seen the controversial episode before it screened, possibly at the urging of ABC managing director David Anderson.

“Clearly, by Buttrose watching the program before it went to air, there must have been the possibility she would have suggested it be pulled or edited,” Mr McGarrity writes.

“Had she done so, of course, all hell would have been let loose internally and leaks would abound within minutes.

“On the other hand, she saw the program and, according to Anderson, sanctioned it. Exactly where does that place the other five ABC board members (other than Buttrose and Anderson)? Are they not effectively muzzled by their chair’s unilateral prior viewing and sanctioning?

“And what does this say about Anderson? Does his action, which presumably involved him suggesting the chair see the program, or not advising her against watching it, indicate he is not really editor in chief when the going gets tough?

“In my view the chair watching the program before it went to air, and the managing director either encouraging or facilitating that, puts his judgment in question.”