ABC and SBS are not distorting media market, government inquiry finds


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

The government’s inquiry into whether the ABC and SBS are competing
fairly with the private sector’s media operators has given a tick to
the public broadcasters.

The report concluded: “Given their market shares, and other factors, this inquiry considers the National Broadcasters are not causing significant competitive distortions beyond the public interest”. But it did see the need for greater transparency from them.

The review arose from a 2017 deal between the government and Pauline
Hanson to get One Nation support for media law changes which
liberalised ownership rules. It has been chaired by Robert Kerr,
formerly from the Productivity Commission. The report was released by
Communications Minister Mitch Fifield on Wednesday.

The outcome will be disappointing to News Corp in particular which has
been highly critical of the ABC’s expansion in online publishing. The
former Fairfax organisation, now taken over by Nine, also complained
about the competition eating into the market of commercial media
groups.

The report said: “Competitive neutrality seeks to ensure that
competition is not distorted by public entities taking inappropriate
advantage of government ownership.

“It is not intended to prevent public entities from competing, nor to
relieve discomfort from competitive processes which are bringing
benefits to consumers as they rapidly adopt and enjoy new services”.

The inquiry found the broadcasters’ business activities in order; they
were “abiding by a best endeavours approach to competitive
neutrality.” It suggested there should be some improvements in
transparency and internal procedures.

Beyond that, “the question arises as to how competitive neutrality
principles about competing fairly without distortion might apply to
the free services delivered by the ABC and SBS.

“Free ABC and SBS services are having some competitive impact.
Submissions included complaints about the ABC’s online news service
and SBS’ multi-channel and streaming services. But the National
Broadcasters are established and funded to provide free services. So
long as they operate within their statutory Charters they are
operating in the public interest”.

The report said submissions questioned whether the broadcasters were
operating within their charters. But, it said, these charters were
very broad, and reporting against them “is not detailed or robust
enough to settle doubts”.

“Accountability is difficult, especially as there is no opportunity
for Charter complaints to be addressed”.

The broadcasters should improve their reporting of charter performance
in the context of competitive neutrality. “If this enhanced reporting
does not occur, the government should consider a way of managing
complaints about Charter performance in this area,” the report said.

“While the National Broadcasters are not prohibited from competing,
some improvements in the way they interact with markets should be
contemplated”.

The report also said the government should consider options for a
longer term funding framework for the national broadcasters,
accompanied by increased transparency and accountability.

Fifield said he recognised the broadcasters’ charters were broad and
allowed flexibility in how their boards implemented them.
“It is now up to the national broadcasters to act on these
recommendations,” he said.

Labor’s communications spokeswoman Michelle Rowland said the
government’s “fishing expedition” had spent half a million dollars to
establish what the public broadcasters had said all along – that they
“are operating in a manner consistent with the general principles of
competitive neutrality.

“Australians trust and value the ABC and SBS and should not have to
foot the bill for Mitch Fifield and Pauline Hanson’s vendetta against
public broadcasting,” she said.

Also in return for Hanson’s support the government agreed to bring in
legislation to require the ABC to be “fair” and “balanced” in its
coverage.

Under the legislation, the board would be required “to ensure that the
gathering and presentation by the Corporation of news and information
is fair, balanced, accurate and impartial according to the recognised
standards of objective journalism.”

But the legislation is bogged down, with no chance of being passed
before the election.

The government has yet to appoint a new ABC chair, after the implosion
within the organisation involving the board sacking managing
director Michelle Guthrie and the resignation of Justin Milne as chair
amid a row over editorial interference.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisements

Inquiry finds Husar behaved badly to staff but dismisses allegations of lewd conduct


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

The inquiry into Labor MP Emma Husar’s conduct has upheld complaints that she behaved unreasonably towards her staff, but rejected claims of lewd conduct and misleading the parliament.

These are the central findings of the independent assessment by barrister John Whelan, commissioned by the NSW Labor party. The party said the legal advice, based on this assessment, was that there was “no basis” for Husar to resign from parliament.

Husar, who is in her first term, announced this week she would quit at the election.

NSW Labor issued a summary of the Whelan inquiry’s findings on Friday.




Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Turnbull is trying to turn Emma Husar story into a Bill Shorten narrative


The assessment said the allegation of misuse of public entitlements should be referred to the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority for audit, and noted Husar had advised she was referring herself.

It found allegations of sexual harassment, on the balance of probabilities and Briginshaw Standard, were not supported. Nor were claims that she behaved in a lewd manner in the office of Labor frontbencher Jason Clare.

But complaints that staff performed non-work related and personal duties for Husar had merit – “even accounting for the particular nature of political offices”. They should be referred to the Department of Finance’s Ministerial and Parliamentary Services for advice about the appropriate employment guidelines issued to MPs, the assessment said.

It also found merit in complaints that “staff were subjected to unreasonable management, including unreasonable communication, demands, practices and disciplinary methods”.

The assessment outlined the two contrasting perceptions of what had happened that it had been given.

Husar argued “she manages appropriately to achieve higher standards of performance and loyalty. And does so under a heavy workload, intense personal stress and a desire to serve Western Sydney and in particular the cause of victims of domestic violence.”

But the men and women who made complaints “perceive and allege they have found much of the member’s management offensive and unreasonable”.

“After considering all sides of the relevant issues the assessment has generally favoured the complainant’s perception of events.”

The inquiry recommended Ministerial and Parliamentary Services review the accessibility of the current electorate office staff complaints resolution process.

It also said Husar, who is on extended leave, and Finance’s Ministerial and Parliamentary Services should be asked to develop a “return to work” plan, covering timing, training, staff needs and office support.

The assessment condemned as “reprehensible” the release publicly of selected allegations.

It said there were concerns for the wellbeing of many involved and counselling was being made available.

The full assessment – which emphasised the need for a “de-escalation” – will not be released.

Husar said the report had cleared her “of the most malicious and damaging of allegations, which were not only baseless but leaked to media.”

“I don’t believe any of these should have cost me my reputation, my job, or humiliated me and my children, ” she said.

“This has been trial by media, gossip and innuendo.

“I am gutted that the willingness of certain individuals, and certain parts of the media, to defame me on vexatious and unfounded accusations, has caused so much personal, emotional and professional damage to me, so much hurt to those close to me, and political harm to the party I love, have supported and worked so hard for.”

The ConversationShe said she was confident that if she had been given the opportunity to respond to all allegations in full, without the public attacks, she would have been able to put the matter behind her and continue to serve her electorate of Lindsay.

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Expenses authority can’t tell Joyce when his travel expenses inquiry will end


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

The Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority (IPEA) has told Barnaby Joyce it can’t give him a finish date for the audit into his travel and related expenses, citing the difficulties of an aging system and consulting third parties.

The audit has been underway since early this year, sparked by the controversy around his affair with his former staffer and now partner Vikki Campion. Eventually the row around the affair, which was accompanied by allegations of sexual harassment, saw Joyce resign as Nationals leader and deputy prime minister.

On May 22 Joyce, who has answered multiple questions from the IPEA, wrote to the authority asking where the audit was up to.

The authority’s CEO Annwyn Godwin said in a reply dated May 24 that it was progressing matters “as quickly and with as little formality as a proper consideration of the issues allows”. She said the authority was aware of the outcome’s potential impact “on the reputation and credibility of all involved”.

The IPEA was working “with aging systems and this requires manual integration of a variety of different data sets and information sources,” she wrote.

“It is therefore important that care and attention is given to cross referencing and substantiating details where appropriate.

“This cross referencing may require sourcing additional information from third parties adding to the timeframes overall.

“Due to our current engagement with a number of third parties, and noting the members of the authority must consider and deliberate upon the audit findings, I am unable to give you a definitive date by which the audit will be complete.

“I can however assure you that I consider it in everyone’s best interests that the audit is finalised as soon as possible,” the letter said.

Joyce said in his reply that as an accountant, he understood the issues with audit process.

But he said that “an extenuated period of no conclusion” risked the audit possibly being branded a “fishing expedition”.

Joyce has said his expenses were done by members of his staff and then checked by him to avoid mistakes in claims.

The ConversationThe Nationals launched an inquiry into the sexual harassment allegation, but Joyce has not yet received an outcome on that, either.

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

News outlets air grievances and Facebook plays the underdog in ACCC inquiry



File 20180507 166906 1x6rsur.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
The ACCC inquiry looks at the impact of digital platforms on the supply of news and journalistic content.
Shutterstock

Andrew Quodling, Queensland University of Technology

The recent Cambridge Analytica scandal and congressional testimony of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has brought global attention to the power and influence of Facebook as a platform. It has also invigorated discussions about how such platforms should be regulated.

Meanwhile, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has been conducting an inquiry into the influence of digital platforms on media and advertising markets in Australia.




Read more:
Google and Facebook cosy up to media companies in response to the threat of regulation


Submissions to the inquiry by a range of media outlets, advertisers, as well as Google and Facebook, were published last week. Although Facebook has expressed interest in participating in regulatory debates, its submission is a disappointing early indication of how we might expect the company to downplay its magnitude and its roles in future regulatory debates.

The purpose of the inquiry

Late in 2017, the Federal Treasurer, Scott Morrison, directed the ACCC to conduct the inquiry into digital platforms, including search engines, social networks and other aggregators. As part of the ongoing inquiry, the ACCC will consider:

the impact of digital platforms on the supply of news and journalistic content and the implications of this for media content creators, advertisers and consumers.

It came about as a result of negotiations between the government and the former independent Senator Nick Xenophon. Xenophon insisted on the inquiry in exchange for his support for the government’s changes to Media Ownership laws.

To some extent, the inquiry retreads familiar ground. Old anxieties about declining revenues for journalistic organisations and the advent of internet technologies and internet-focused stakeholders continue a conversation that has been going for well over a decade.

News outlets air grievances

In total, the ACCC published 57 submissions. This includes contributions from most major Australian media organisations, industry bodies, unions and advertisers.

Many respondents took the opportunity to criticise the narrow scope of the inquiry. The inquiry’s scope is somewhat frustrating considering the complexities digital platforms present. They impact not just media and journalism markets, but also aspects of political, social and everyday life.

While the ABC’s submission was generally favourable in its discussion of online platforms, other Australian media organisations used the inquiry as an opportunity to air grievances about the impact of digital platforms.




Read more:
Government regulation of social media would be a cure far worse than the disease


News Corp accused the platforms of abusing the local market and engaging in anti-competitive practices. Commercial Radio Australia pointed to a lack of regulation compelling transparent and structured audience metrics. Nine complained of declining revenues and a lack of platform-specific regulations, while Foxtel raised the issue of copyright infringement.

Seven West Media and Ten argued that there is a barrier to entry imposed on traditional publishers by the significant existing collection of personal data that platforms like Facebook and Google can leverage.

The platforms respond

In their submissions, Facebook and Google both attempted to build a narrative that emphasised how the tools and systems they provide can empower journalists and other content creators. Meanwhile, they minimised or outright ignored the opportunity to discuss the broader concerns of the broadcasters, publishers and individuals who are stakeholders in the industries Facebook and Google are operating in.

Google’s short response to the inquiry is not particularly interesting, in part due to its brevity and its focus on championing Google’s notionally positive influence for publishers. Facebook had significantly more to say in its 56 page submission, which also gives context to Mark Zuckerberg’s recent comments welcoming the potential for regulation.

Facebook plays the underdog

Facebook’s submission reveals how the company portrays itself to regulators, with an interesting element of self-deprecation. Take for example, the statement that:

Facebook is popular, but it is just one small part of how Australians connect with friends, family and the world around us.

Given a user-base that dwarfs the population of, well, even the most populous countries, Facebook’s most compelling option for presenting itself as an underdog in this space is to compare itself by share of “attention”, rather than share of market.

Facebook presents “multi-homing” – the practice of having and using a variety apps on your phone – as a key concern. It paints a picture of precarity in a marketplace that they dominate.




Read more:
How to regulate Facebook and the online giants in one word: transparency


Facebook’s arguments about competition also ring hollow because the platform’s design and scale allows it to benefit from significant network effects.

Put simply, a network effect is when existing and new users benefit from the growth of a network. A familiar example of these effects can be seen in the services of mobile phone network providers. Telstra and Optus provide cheaper, or no-cost calls or messaging between customers of their own service.

But the similarities end there. While you could still call a friend with a competing mobile phone provider, there is no such interoperability with platforms like Facebook. This design helps Facebook protect its market power by keeping total control over the Facebook platfom’s network.

If you decide to leave Facebook, you sever the connections between yourself and other users of the platform. Given Facebook’s focus on augmenting social functions this can, quite literally, be an ostracising endeavour. In spite of both the recent Cambridge Analytica revelations, and several #deletefacebook campaigns, we’re yet to see a significant exodus of users from the platform.

A disappointing response

Facebook has a colossal user base. Over two billion people use the platform each month, and almost three quarters of those people use Facebook on a daily basis. It owns Instagram and WhatsApp – each of which are profoundly successful platforms in their own right.

The ConversationFacebook is a titan of this industry, and the sooner it stops pretending to be a bit player, the richer our discourse about platforms and their role in society can become.

Andrew Quodling, PhD candidate researching governance of social media platforms, Queensland University of Technology

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The politics behind the competitive neutrality inquiry into ABC and SBS


Denis Muller, University of Melbourne

Last September, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson made a deal with Malcolm Turnbull’s government: You give me an inquiry into the ABC and I’ll support the changes you want to make to media ownership laws.

The government agreed to do this in the form of an inquiry into the ABC’s competitive neutrality – and broadened it to include SBS.

It was clear at the time this had the potential to do real damage to the national broadcaster.

Competitive neutrality principles say an organisation should not enjoy an undue competitive advantage by virtue of it being government-funded. It is suitably arcane camouflage for an inquiry whose real purpose is to put pressure on the ABC over its news service, which Hanson had alleged was biased against her.

It was Hanson’s way of getting revenge on the ABC for its pursuit of her over the issue of funding for her senate re-election campaign in 2016.

And now we know the shape of this competitive neutrality inquiry. We know who is conducting it, and last week we got to see the issues paper that the inquiry put out, which tells us what it is going to cover.

Scope of the inquiry

The chair is Robert Kerr, who has a Productivity Commission background and impeccable credentials as a free-market economist. Joining him in the inquiry are Julie Flynn, a one-time ABC reporter who used to be CEO of the commercial TV lobby group Free TV Australia, and Sandra Levy, the former head of television at ABC.

This all seems perfectly reasonable, until you remember this is mainly about online media. In that case, why have two people with television backgrounds on the panel?

Online is where the real action is now. Data from the Australian Communications and Media Authority included in the issues paper show just how dramatic the shift has been from traditional television viewing to digital online platforms for media consumption. In 2017, Australians aged 18-34 spent an average of 9.2 hours per week watching video content online compared to just 3.8 hours watching free-to-air television.




Read more:
In the debate about Australian content on TV, we need to look further than the ABC


Mark Scott foresaw this when he was managing director of the ABC and drove the broadcaster hard into the digital sphere. He realised that if the ABC was not a relevant provider of digital content online, it would soon cease to be relevant.

That’s why the other big media players, especially Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, have lobbied relentlessly to have the ABC’s wings clipped in this arena. Hanson, wittingly or not, played right into News Corp’s strategy.

As for the issues paper, the giveaway is on page 11.

There, it refers to the requirement in the ABC Act that the ABC “take account of the broadcasting services provided by the commercial and community broadcasting sectors of the Australian Broadcasting system.” In other words, the ABC is discouraged from just replicating what the commercial broadcasters do.

In that context, the paper then addresses this question to the ABC: How does it apply this requirement specifically to its on-air, iView and online news services? Nothing else. Not its drama or documentaries or narrative comedy or children’s programs. Just its news services.

The reason? That’s the part of the ABC that Hanson detests. So there’s the pay-off.

There are some broader competition questions, as well, but the only part of its vast portfolio the ABC is specifically asked about is its news output. Yet, if there is one category of program content that most obviously and unmistakably distinguishes the ABC from commercial broadcasters, it’s news.

Time for responses

Then the issues paper asks “other stakeholders” – basically the ABC and SBS’s commercial broadcasting rivals – a range of questions about ways in which they think they may have been harmed by any undue competitive advantage enjoyed by the public broadcasters.

There is no indication the answers to these questions are going to be subjected to any cross-examination by the ABC or SBS. Not that there would be time for that anyway, with just three months between the deadline for submissions in response to the issues paper on June 22 and the completion of the report in September.

So, the inquiry is a quickie. And by its own admission, it’s trampling over ground already covered 18 years ago by the Productivity Commission.




Read more:
The ABC is not siphoning audiences from Fairfax


It also acknowledges in the issues paper that it has to dance its way between a number of other current inquiries, including the Australian and Children’s Content Review, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s digital platforms inquiry and the broader Treasury review of the country’s overall competitive neutrality policy.

The ConversationNonetheless, the inquiry is likely to provide the Turnbull Government with ammunition should it wish to mount an attack on the ABC’s scope of operations (especially online) and give Hanson what she really wants: a rolled-up piece of paper with which to smack the ABC around the head.

Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Advancing Journalism, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Why the big four asked for a parliamentary inquiry into banking


George Rennie, University of Melbourne

The major Australian banks are following familiar public relations tactics in requesting a parliamentary commission of inquiry into banking and financial services.

When the public mood is against an industry, it will try to win the public over, while getting the politicians to ignore the public mood. If that fails, the industry gradually concedes ground until attention goes elsewhere.

For this reason, the banks went from being steadfastly against a commission, to offering the option of self-regulation, to proposing a new “banking tribunal”, to eventually conceding, after the battle had already been lost, to a parliamentary inquiry.

The big problem for the banks, and a big part of the reason that their previous lobbying failed, is that their popularity with the Australian public is very low. This allowed, or pressured, politicians to call for the commission, and presents significant problems for the banks going forward, especially if they wish to avoid tougher regulation.


Read more: Royal commissions: how do they work?


The banks capitulated only once it became “all but inevitable” that an inquiry of some sort would be held.

Due to the recent citizenship saga, it was looking likely that a coalition of crossbench, Labor, Greens and some Nationals MPs would pass a bill for a commission of inquiry into the banks and other financial institutions.

Labor had already promised to set up a royal commission into the banking and financial services industry if it won the next election.

Concede ground only when it’s already lost

A royal commission will almost certainly bring many months of bad press for the banks.

As the industry has repeatedly made clear, it never wanted a royal commission. The banks claimed they had corrected the mistakes of the past and that a commission was “unwarranted”.

So the banking industry’s public and private lobbying efforts were geared towards convincing politicians to resist calls for the commission, while trying to boost public opinion by highlighting their corporate social responsibility.

This involved sacking executives over this scandal or that, removing certain ATM fees, and cutting bonuses and director pay.

The banks have also launched advertising campaigns, such as one highlighting that many Australians own bank shares through their superannuation.

Concurrently, the banks hoped that threatening to launch a “mining tax”-style ad campaign might scare politicians away from calling for a commission.

These campaigns have become a common threat since the success of the 2010 mining tax campaign opened corporate Australia’s eyes to the potential effectiveness of advocacy ads.


Read more: Banking royal commission will expose the real cost of bad behaviour


Tactics similar to those the banks are employing now have been used to varying degrees of success in the United States by the tobacco industry and the gun, finance and healthcare lobbies.

In 1998 the American tobacco industry agreed to make payments of over US$200 billion to dozens of states. But this happened only after decades of public education and campaigning against smoking.

Similarly, the American healthcare lobby successfully fought off several attempts to reform healthcare. Obamacare managed to pass in 2010 only after the industry got to substantively write it.

The public relations game

Appearing to co-operate and atone is the best way to try to influence the terms of an inquiry. It also helps to mitigate the worst of any bad press to come. This reflects a wider, pragmatic strategy of lobbying and public relations employed by the banks and other industries.

The focus for the banks will now shift towards damage control, along with heavy promotion of the banks “doing the right thing” by Australia.

To that end, expect to see even more banners proclaiming a bank’s sponsorship of the local footy team, and ads promoting the good work done in your local community.

The ConversationThese, along with an insistence that the commission is a witch hunt, that its findings are “old news”, that the banks have already taken steps to deal with the issue, will underpin the industry’s public relations battle while the royal commission takes place.

George Rennie, Lecturer in American Politics and Lobbying Strategies, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Turnbull talks with rebel National on banks


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

Malcolm Turnbull and senator Barry O’Sullivan have discussed the rebel National’s private senator’s bill for a commission of inquiry into the banks and other financial institutions.

As the stand-off continues over an inquiry, Turnbull on Tuesday publicly reaffirmed that “we are not going to establish a royal commission”.

But behind the scenes Turnbull appears to be seeking some resolution of the impasse, which could lead to his hand being forced.

It is believed he is due to have a further discussion with O’Sullivan after the bill is printed.

O’Sullivan refused to confirm Tuesday’s meeting.

The bill is now considered to have the numbers to pass not just in the Senate but in the House of Representatives as well. Two lower house Nationals, George Christensen and Llew O’Brien, are supporters, although O’Brien has cast his backing in terms of being “quite likely” to vote for it.

Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce, who is fighting a byelection in New England to get back into parliament, has indicated he is very willing to have the bank inquiry issue considered by the Nationals’ partyroom, and has signalled he is relaxed about the outcome. The O’Sullivan bill will be discussed there on Monday.

If the Nationals as a party moved to support an inquiry, Turnbull would be deeply embarrassed.

O’Sullivan was inundated with suggestions for fine-tuning after circulating his draft bill, and it has taken some time for these to be dealt with and a final version to be sent to the parliamentary draftsman.

Turnbull, campaigning in Bennelong for the byelection in that seat, said the government had been concentrating on “positive steps, real reforms right now”.

“We have put more money into the regulators to give them stronger teeth and more effective powers. And of course we are setting up the one-stop shop, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, which will mean that people will have one place to go to for help and assistance with complaints and concerns with their financial service providers.

“We are constantly working to ensure that the cultural change in the banks occurs and we are getting strong support for that,” he said.

“Our focus is on results. It is on action. That is why we have not supported a royal commission.”

Turnbull argues that a royal commission would take a very long time and delay getting results.

But O’Sullivan has maintained that what is fundamental is achieving cultural change and this won’t happen without a bright light being shone on the way banks and other institution have operated.

The commission proposed in the O’Sullivan bill is one that would be set up by parliament and report back to parliament. A royal commission is set up by the executive and reports to the executive.

The ConversationEssential Media, in a poll published on Tuesday, reported 64% supported holding a royal commission into banking and the financial services industry and 12% opposed. Support among Labor voters was 72% – among Coalition voters it was 62%.

https://www.podbean.com/media/player/nqtdd-7bf599?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Turnbull backed against the wall by rebel Nationals on bank inquiry


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Treasurer Scott Morrison appear to have become hostages to rebel Nationals determined at all costs to secure a commission of inquiry into the banks.

On Monday a second federal National, Llew O’Brien, from Queensland flagged he is likely to cross the floor in the House of Representatives to support the private member’s bill sponsored by Queensland Nationals senator Barry O’Sullivan to set up a commission of inquiry that would investigate a broad range of financial institutions.

O’Brien, who has inserted an extra term of reference to protect people with mental health issues from discrimination, said “I like what I see” in the proposed bill. But he added that he would respect his party’s process. The bill is due to go to the Nationals’ partyroom on Monday.

The bill, which has the numbers to get through the Senate, is supported in the lower house by Queensland MP George Christensen, who after Saturday’s Queensland election apologised to One Nation voters for “we in the LNP” letting them down.

Backed by Christensen and O’Brien, together with Labor and crossbenchers, the bill would have the required 76 votes to enable its consideration by the lower house – although when it can get to be debated there is not clear.

In a discussion last week – later leaked – cabinet considered whether the government should adopt a pragmatic position and give in to calls for a royal commission. But Turnbull and Morrison have refused to do so.

Now the cabinet looks like it will have to decide whether to own the process of an inquiry or have it forced on it.

If Monday’s Nationals’ party meeting endorsed the bill, that would escalate the situation dangerously for the government, unless it had softened its opposition to an inquiry. It would amount to the minor Coalition partner formally rejecting a government position.

Cabinet would have to back down, or find some other way through.

As the crisis over the banking probe deepens for the government, there is currently no-one with the authority or availability within the Nationals to manage the situation.

Barnaby Joyce remains leader but he’s absorbed in Saturday’s New England byelection, which is his path back into parliament. Senator Nigel Scullion is parliamentary leader but has little clout to curb the determined rebels.

With the commission push gaining momentum there is also less desire from some senior Nationals to fight it. Joyce is said to be relaxed about having a banking inquiry, which would be popular among voters and could be chalked up as a win for the Nationals.

The election loss in Queensland has strengthened the federal Nationals’ determination to pursue brand differentiation.

O’Sullivan has repeatedly referenced the example of Liberal Dean Smith’s use of a private member’s bill to pursue the cause of same-sex marriage, arguing he is following Smith’s pathway.

But there are still divided opinions within the parliamentary party about the bank probe. Resources Minister Matt Canavan, a member of cabinet, on Monday reaffirmed his opposition to a royal commission.

Joyce is likely to attend Monday’s party meeting although he will not be formally back in parliament by then.

Nationals are not clear whether they will elect their new deputy on Monday to replace Fiona Nash, who was ruled ineligible by the High Court because she had been a dual British citizen when she nominated. There is some speculation that this might be delayed to give aspirants time to lobby.

If there is no deputy leader chosen on Monday, it would mean that the minor party would be literally leaderless on the government frontbench in the House of Representatives. Infrastructure Minister Darren Chester would be the most senior National sitting behind Turnbull in Question Time.

Christensen on Monday launched a website with a petition seeking signatures for a banking inquiry.

“Misconduct is not in the ‘past’,” he says on the site. “It is not being fixed by the industry to a standard acceptable to the community. Although positive steps are being made by government reforms, gaps still exist.

“Enough is enough … unless the government acts to establish a royal commission, I will be acting before the end of this year to vote for a commission of inquiry into the banks.” The site also invites people “bitten by the banks” to “tell your story”.

The ConversationA commission of inquiry differs from a royal commission in being set up by and reporting to parliament, rather than being established by and reporting to the executive.

https://www.podbean.com/media/player/nqtdd-7bf599?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Recent Incidents of Persecution


Tamil Nadu, India, September 30 (CDN) — Police detained evangelist V.K. Williams and seven other Christians after Hindu extremists disrupted their evangelistic meeting on Sept. 29 in Theni, according to the Global Council of Indian Christians. The extremists filed a complaint against the Christians of “forceful conversion” and pressured police to arrest them, and officers took the eight Christians to the station for questioning. At press time, area Christian leaders were trying to free them.

West Bengal – On Sept. 26 in Purulia, Hindu extremists stopped a worship service and dragged Christians out, saying no more prayer or worship should take place in the village. A source in Kolkata reported that the extremists were threatening to kill the Christians if they did not convert to Hinduism. The Christians reported the matter to the Kenda Police Station. Officers summoned both parties to the police station, but the extremists threatened to kill the Christians if they went.

Karnataka – Hindu extremists belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Bajrang Dal attacked Gnanodya Church at Yellapura, Karwar district, on Sept. 26. The All India Christian Council reported that the assailants broke into a church worship service after having filed a complaint against Pastor Shiva Ram of “forcible conversions.” In the presence of the police, the attackers started to vandalize the church, pulling down calendars and breaking furniture. Church members said their pastor was targeted because of his social service works. Police took the pastor into custody and jailed him.

Karnataka – Karnataka police on Sept. 26 arrested a Pentecostal pastor, Shivanda Siddi, on false charges of “forceful conversions” in Mundgod. The Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC) reported that at about 11 a.m. five Hindu extremists from the Bajrang Dal stormed the church building while Christians were praying and began arguing with the pastor. They beat him, stripped him of his clothes and took Bibles from those present. The extremists later telephoned police in Yellapur, about three kilometers away (less than two miles), and an inspector arrived and took the pastor, seven women and two young children to the police station. The extremists continued to threaten the Christians in front of police, who watched in silence. With GCIC intervention, police released the women and children without charges, but Pastor Siddi was charged with “defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class.” He was put in Uttar Kananda’s Sirsi prison.

Karnataka – On Sept. 19 in Santhemarnalli, police led by Inspector Madhava Swamy threatened a pastor with harm if he did not stop alleged “forceful conversion” activities. The All India Christian Council reported that police threatened Pastor Mhades of Good Shepherd Community Church after Hindu extremists filed the complaint against him. Police barged into his church, questioned him and told him that they would take action against him if he did not stop trying to convert people. Area Christian leaders claimed that there was no case of forceful conversion, and that Christians were only conducting their regular worship services.

Andhra Pradesh – Police on Sept. 17 arrested a Christian convert from Islam, Sheik Magbool, after Muslim extremists filed a complaint against him of uttering derogatory remarks against the prophet of Islam, Muhammad, in Kurnool. A source reported that Maqbool organized a three-day, open air Christian meeting and distributed some tracts that allegedly contained comparisons between the teachings of Jesus Christ and those of Muhammad. The Muslim extremists accused Maqbool of making derogatory remarks against Muhammad, threatened to kill him and filed a police complaint against him. Area Christian leaders maintained that the tracts did not contain any hateful remarks against Muhammad; they asserted that the Muslim extremists reprinted the tracts after adding some lines insulting to Muhammad in order to fabricate a case against the Christians. Maqbool was put in a jail cell, with the Down Court rejecting his petition for bail on Sept. 21.

Chhattisgarh – On Sept. 15 in Raipur, Hindu extremists misrepresenting themselves as journalists barged into a prayer meeting led by Pastor Kamlakarrao Bokada and accused him of “forceful conversion,” verbally abused him and falsely accused him of dishonoring their idols. They ordered the pastor to video-record the prayer meeting, but he refused. The pastor, who visits Christian homes in the Khorpi area, was ordered not to do so again. Police refused to register a complaint by Christians.

Andhra Pradesh – Hindu extremists in Vizianagaram on Sept. 13 attacked a pastor’s wife, injuring her head, and told the church leader to leave the area, according to the All India Christian Council. The attack came after Pastor Y. Caleb Raj of Good Shepherd Community Church requested that youths playing loud music before the idol of Ganesh near his church not disturb the Sept. 12 worship service. As the pastor was speaking to organizers of the Ganesh event, Hindu extremists gathered and some tried to manhandle him. They told him to close down the church and leave the village. When Pastor Raj was out on ministry work the next day, the same group of Hindu extremists came and struck his wife with a wooden club. Pastor Raj filed a police complaint, but no arrests had been made at press time.

Chhattisgarh – Hindu extremists in Raigarh on Sept. 12 beat evangelist Robinson Roat and ordered him to stop all Christian activities. The Global Council of Indian Christians reported that about 25 extremists barged into the worship meeting in Roat’s home. They told him he would face further harm if he left his house. The Christian did not venture out for two days.

Madhya Pradesh – Hindu extremists in Satna on Sept. 12 accused Pastor V.A. Anthony of “forceful conversion” and of carrying out the funeral of a non-Christian in a local Christian cemetery. Based on the complaint of the Hindu extremists, the inspector general of police summoned Pastor Anthony and a high-level inquiry is pending, reported the Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC). The son of a local church member had died under mysterious circumstances earlier this year, and the pastor and church members had buried him in the Christian cemetery according to the wishes of his parents and other relatives, according to the GCIC.

Uttar Pradesh – Hindu nationalists from the extremist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Sept. 5 beat a pastor in Sarva village in Babina, Jhansi district. The Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC) reported that three Hindu extremists led by Surendra Yadav and armed with wooden clubs barged into the church building after Sunday classes and beat Pastor Anil Masih on his back and legs, kicked him and verbally abused him. The assault went on for about 30 minutes. The next day, Masih’s father informed Babina police. Masih received hospital treatment for a broken left leg. GCIC sources told Compass that after Masih’s discharge from the hospital on Sept. 10, he filed a complaint against the extremists at the Babina police station on Sept. 13. At press time, no arrests had been made.

Karnataka – Police on Sept. 1 stopped a pastors’ meeting in Mysore, claiming that they were being trained to “convert people,” though conversion and persuading to convert is legal in India. The Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC) reported that the Mysore Pastors Association organized a two-week pastoral training program with about 50 local church leaders and evangelists in attendance. Police arrived and ordered the organizers to vacate the premises by the next day. Even though such trainings are legally permitted in India, the Christians called off the meeting.

Rajasthan – Hindu extremists attacked two Christian workers, damaged their vehicles and seized evangelistic literature from them on Aug. 26 in Udaipur. The All India Christian Council reported that evangelists Charlie John and V.M. George were distributing gospel tracts when a group of Hindu extremists suddenly came and began objecting. The extremists blocked their vehicle and beat the two Christians, leaving them with serious injuries. Police came to their rescue and suggested they file a complaint against the extremists, but the Christians said they chose to forgive their attackers.

Report from Compass Direct News

Christian Convert in Bangladesh Falsely Accused of Theft


Muslims said to use mistaken identity to stop activities of Christian who refused to recant.

DHAKA, Bangladesh, August 27 (CDN) — A Christian convert from Islam was falsely arrested for cattle theft last weekend in a bid by influential Muslims to stop his Christian activities, area villagers said.

Day laborer Abul Hossen, 41, was arrested on Saturday (Aug. 21) for alleged cattle theft in Dubachari village in Nilphamari district, some 300 kilometers (180 miles) northwest of the capital, Dhaka.

Christian villagers told Compass that Hossen was the victim of “dirty tricks” by influential Muslims.

“There is another Abul Hossen in the village who might be the thief, but his father-in-law is very powerful,” said Gonesh Roy. “To save his son-in-law, he imputed all the blame to a different Abul Hossen who is a completely good man.”

Hossen, who converted to Christianity from Islam in 2007, has been very active in the community, and Muslims are harassing him with the charge so his ministry will be discredited and villagers will denounce his faith, Roy said.

“If he can be accused in the cattle theft case, he will be put in jail,” Roy said. “He will be a convicted man, and local people and the believers will treat him as a cattle thief. So people will not listen to a thief whatsoever.”

Some 150 villagers, about 20 percent of them Christian, went to the police station to plea for his freedom, he and other villagers said.

Sanjoy Roy, a lay pastor with Christian Life Bangladesh, told Compass that Hossen was a fervent Christian and that some Muslims have been trying to harass him since his conversion.

“They are hoping that if he is embarrassed by this kind of humiliation, he might not witness to Christ anymore, and it will be easy to take other converted Christians back to Islam,” Sanjoy Roy said. “He is a victim of dirty tricks by some local people.”  

Hossen was baptized on June, 12, 2007 along with 40 other people who were raised as Muslims. Of the 41 people baptized, only seven remained Christian, with villagers and Muslim missionaries called Tabligh Jamat forcing the remaining 34 people to return to Islam within six months, sources said.

Local police chief Mohammad Nurul Islam told Compass that officers had arrested a cattle thief who confessed to police that his accomplice was named Abul Hossen.

“Based on the thief’s confessional statement, we arrested Abul Hossen,” said Islam. “There are several people named Abul Hossen in the village, but the thief told exactly of this Abul Hossen whom we arrested.”

Hossen denied the allegation that he was involved in cattle theft, Islam said.

“Hossen is vehemently denying the allegation, but the thief was firm and adamantly said that Hossen was with him during the theft,” he said. “Then we took Hossen on remand for three days for further inquiry.”

A former union council chairman who is Muslim, Aminur Rahman, also told Compass that Hossen was a scapegoat.

“He is 100 percent good man,” said Rahman, who also went to the police station to plea for Hossen’s freedom the day after his arrest. “There are two or three people named Abul Hossen in the village. Anyone of them might have stolen the cattle, but I can vouch for the arrested Abul Hossen that he did not do this crime.”

Whether Hossen is a Christian, Muslim or Hindu should not matter in the eyes of the law, Rahman said.

“He is an innocent man,” he said. “So he should not be punished or harassed. That is why I went to police station to request police to free him.”

Local government Union Council Chairman Shamcharan Roy, a Hindu from Lakmichap Union, told Compass that Hossen was not engaged in any kind of criminal activities.

“In my eight years of tenure as a union council chairman, I did not find him engaged in any kind of criminal activities,” said Shamcharan Roy. “Even before my tenure as a chairman, I did not see him troublesome in the social matrix.”

Immediately after Hossen’s arrest, Shamcharan Roy went to the police station and requested that he be freed, he added.

“I was under pressure from local people to free him from custody – more than 100 villagers went to the police camp, getting drenched to the skin in the heavy downpour, and requested police to free him,” Shamcharan Roy said. “Police are listening to a thief but are deaf to our factual accounts about Abul Hossen.”

In July 2007, local Muslims and Tabligh Jamat missionaries gathered in a schoolyard near the homes of some of the Christians who had been baptized on June 12, a source said. Using a microphone, the Muslims threatened violence if the converts did not come out.

Fearing for their lives, the Christians emerged and gathered. The source said the Muslims asked them why they had become Christians and, furious, told them that Bangladesh was a Muslim country “where you cannot change your faith by your own will.”

At that time, Hossen told Compass that Muslims in the mosque threatened to hang him in a tree upside down and lacerate his body with a blade. Hossen said the Muslims “do not allow us to net fish in the river” and offered him 5,000 taka (US$75) and a mobile phone handset if he returned to Islam.

“But I did not give up my faith, because I found Christ in my heart,” Hossen told Compass in 2007. “They threatened me with severe consequences if I do not go back to Islam. I said I am ready to offer up my life to Christ, but I won’t renounce my faith in Him.”

Report from Compass Direct News