ABA chief, David Flint, has rejected Opposition calls for him to quit.
Professor Flint says there are no grounds for him to resign and the Jones’ letter had nothing to do with politics.
He also says that despite the latest Media Watch documents, he feels there is no new case to answer in relation to Telstra’s deal.
ABC Radio’s ‘PM’ devoted a significant part of yesterday’s program to grilling the person who was responsible for investigating complaints of bias made against the same program by Senator Alston.
Two reports were followed by an interview with Flint, who began by correcting some items in the preceeding segments:
“Let me correct two errors in your report first. It is wrong to say that the board requested legal advice on whether there was a conflict of interest in my sitting on Senator Alston’s complaints…
And, secondly, it’s wrong to say I was a political appointment. The Government could not have known my political views when I was appointed. I was appointed on merit, I suspect, because I had been chairman, a successful chairman, of the Australian Press Council.”
Flint then said there was no misconduct and no reason for him to resign, even though a ‘PM’ report suggested that he had lost the confidence of a majority of members of the ABA board:
MARK COLVIN: But you were expressing you’re approbation of him on ABA letterhead, implying therefore, that it was you as the Chairman of the ABA who approved of him.
DAVID FLINT: No. I was encouraging him for widening the political debate in Australia across policy areas, particularly in this instance in a matter of economic policy.
MARK COLVIN: But you did so on Australian Broadcasting Authority letterhead.
DAVID FLINT: Well that’s how we communicated. And at that stage, there was no question…
MARK COLVIN: But, I’m sorry. Why didn’t you write him a letter on your own letterhead?
DAVID FLINT: There was no question at that stage of there being an investigation. That was, that was not at all on the horizon.
MARK COLVIN: I’m sorry. Why did there have to be a question? You are the regulator of the industry in which he works.
DAVID FLINT: Yes, and we have good relations, where… we have good relations with the people we regulate as far as that is possible because we are a co-regulatory body. You see, we’re not a distant tribunal.
MARK COLVIN: But Professor Flint, you as the regulator wrote what I described, and I think it’s a reasonable description, as an effusive letter praising somebody that you’re regulating. Why can’t you see that that is a conflict of interest?
DAVID FLINT: There’s no conflict of interest there. The letter was expressing encouragement in relation to his expanding the different diverse views that emerge in debate in Australia. That’s what the letter was about.
MARK COLVIN: Right. Does it surprise you that four of the board members, of your colleagues on the board, have said that you should not have written the letter to PM today?
DAVID FLINT: Well that’s what your report said, but I don’t know who they are.
MARK COLVIN: Well, they’re not speaking on the record, but as I say, we contacted four board members and all the four that we contacted said you should not have written the letter and expressed great frustration at your behaviour, particularly your public utterances.
DAVID FLINT: I don’t wish to discuss anonymous views. If people wish to have views, they should come out and make them. If they’re anonymous, I don’t know what value to put on them.
MARK COLVIN: Do you believe that you enjoy the full confidence of your board at the moment?
DAVID FLINT: That is not a concern of mine, because my appointment is a statutory appointment. It’s not a question of there being confidences between us in terms of appointing one another, we don’t appoint one another, we’re appointed by the Crown.
MARK COLVIN: But… so you’re saying that only the Government can back or sack you?
DAVID FLINT: No. There’s a procedure in relation to misbehaviour, that’s well established and that can be followed, but I don’t believe that I have been guilty of misbehaviour.
MARK COLVIN: If there were a vote of no confidence in you by the board, what would the Government… what position would the Government be in?
DAVID FLINT: That is not within the power of the board to adopt.
MARK COLVIN: On another question which has arisen about conflicts of interest. It’s alleged that because you have attacked the ABC robustly – and obviously you have a right to write books – but because you’ve done so and because you’ve also been a robust supporter of the Iraq war – which you have a right to do – then you should recuse yourself from investigating Senator Alston’s complaints against the AM program. What do you say to that?
DAVID FLINT: I haven’t attacked the ABC robustly. I attacked a particular program and a particular host of that program. I certainly didn’t attack the ABC, which I strongly support.
Click below to see the PM report.