You know there is something seriously wrong with a national public broadcaster when, in answering a posed question, one of its directors is accused by a television reporter of the same ilk, of having tried to influence him. To me, it's a matter common sense. I don't think an officer of the French army ever said to Napoleon, "We'll be fighting over here now." Not if he had any lasting affection for his head. Certainly, the field officer can fight a chosen battle the way he thinks fit, but it's Napoleon who picks the battle and gives the commands.

Australia is proving to be a unique country in more ways than one. Not only has our great modern nation established the southern hemisphere's most dynamic and prosperous economy, but we've also managed to set up a system of public broadcasting that is both, proudly and entirely, away from the clutching hands of the public.

The present broadcasting system is not consistent with the original vision for the ABC. In 1932, the original intention was elegantly expressed by both the member for Cowper, Earle Page and then Postmaster General, James Fenton, and greatly supported, on the political control issue, by the member for West Sydney, John Beasley. The plan was to generally follow the successful BBC model which was clearly based on Westminster traditions of accountability and ministerial responsibility. Unfortunately, soon after a most distracting and inconvenient financial depression, along came the rampaging member for North Sydney, William (Billy) Hughes. This man brilliantly clouded original concepts, and with one tremendous lie, fatally infected Australian public broadcasting with a slow-acting poison.

It was Beasley who best understood the prickly topic of political control and public broadcasting. "I have no objection to power being placed in the hands of the Minister. I honestly believe that the opinion of the people should be reflected in the operation of a great national institution such as this. ...Too much capital is made out of the bogy of political control." Page also followed the Beasley line, especially concerning the appointment of the managing director. He explained that "when the British Broadcasting Corporation was brought into being, the British Parliament deliberately adopted the principle I am now recommending, by appointing, not only a board of governors to lay down a general policy, but also a director-general, and naming him in the bill."

So, what exactly was the Hughes lie? On the 10 March 1932, Hughes told the House of Representatives that "the underlying principle in the control of wireless by the British Broadcasting Corporation is complete independence of outside control." When referring to Fenton he said, "his continuous references to the British Broadcasting Corporation, seem to be so much beating the air. As I pointed out, there is nothing in this measure which is analogous to the system under which the British Broadcasting Corporation operates. That is an independent authority free from all political control." That was a lie then, as it would be today.

As sure as the ascension in 1972 of Gough Whitlam, the time has once again come for change. But, this time, it's the ABC Act which needs the overhaul. Firstly, the board of directors of the ABC should ensure that the organisation is not only directed and managed in the public interest but also accountable to both taxpayers and to the parliament. Therefore section 8 of the ABC Act should be broadened. Further, a new section of the Act should be inserted dealing with the necessity of accountability in the Westminster tradition. This would replace both the totally useless sub-section 8(2) and the last resort "national interest" provision in the Act, the latter which allows for ministerial intervention in extreme circumstances.

Secondly, as is now abundantly clear, no one person will ever be able to manage the affairs of the ABC effectively. So let's drop the search now for the "crazy ideas" guy. Certainly, keep the position of managing director - but his or her role should be greatly diminished. To that end, section 10 of the ABC Act should be abolished. The board of directors of the ABC should manage the affairs of the corporation. A section similar to clause 7 of the BBC Charter, where the directors would, amongst other things, set objectives and monitor performance against them should be inserted. These changes would have the effect of moving the ABC a long way closer to the highly respected BBC model, which was something that was always intended.

These views are solely the opinions of the writer, regardless of how close to the truth they may be.

This article was posted to this site by John Cavanagh on the 2nd June 2002.