Our DAY THREE reporting on the Lattouf v. ABC case will be on this thread and starting at 10.15am AEDT, the proceedings can be viewed via this link ⬇️
Court will call on two documents from Feb 6 2025 & Jan 31 2025. The Applicant t has been given them.
ABC: The Applicant's intro jumbled the chronology of events. We will correct that. The decision that Lattouf would not continue to present was made solely by Mr Oliver-Taylor.
The only question for the court is the immediate reason for his decision.
A thread the Applicant wishes to construct is that Ms Buttrose, Anderson & Oliver-Taylor were hostile to Lattouf. There was only a perception of partiality in her social media posting.
A second thread is that complaints the ABC influenced actions taken. This is not so.
Now I'd like to turn to the contract between ABC & Lattouf.
ABC: The Applicant's intro jumbled the chronology of events. We will correct that. The decision that Lattouf would not continue to present was made solely by Mr Oliver-Taylor.
The only question for the court is the immediate reason for his decision.
A thread the Applicant wishes to construct is that Ms Buttrose, Anderson & Oliver-Taylor were hostile to Lattouf. There was only a perception of partiality in her social media posting.
A second thread is that complaints the ABC influenced actions taken. This is not so.
Now I'd like to turn to the contract between ABC & Lattouf.
ABC: Lattouf's contract mentions dates, hourly rate of pay, enterprise agreement, basis of agreement. It's a casual employment contract, which includes "should you be offered...", plus a variation term, which gives the ABC the right to alter dates before AND during the period of employment.
The contract also deals with the subject of termination. There is an agreement clause, which specifies ABC policies.
Lattouf began her employment on Monday Dec 18 2023. Less than 2 hours after her first program ended...
Judge wants to see intermediary correspondence.
Less than 2 hours after her first program ended, ABC began to receive complaints about Lattouf. Some came to Mr Anderson who forwarded them to Mr Oliver-Taylor & Mr Melkman, asking them to look into the matter.
The contract also deals with the subject of termination. There is an agreement clause, which specifies ABC policies.
Lattouf began her employment on Monday Dec 18 2023. Less than 2 hours after her first program ended...
Judge wants to see intermediary correspondence.
Less than 2 hours after her first program ended, ABC began to receive complaints about Lattouf. Some came to Mr Anderson who forwarded them to Mr Oliver-Taylor & Mr Melkman, asking them to look into the matter.
ABC: Continuing on the subject of complaints made about Lattouf by ABC.
Oliver-Taylor was concerned about what Lattouf was posting on socials; that she may be in conflict with ABC editorial policy regarding partiality. He asked that the matter be investigated immediately.
Ms Green was asked for feedback & called to meeting. At 2.03pm on Dec 18, same day as Lattouf's 1st show, Green called Mr Ahern & they discussed the matter.
A decision was made to ask Lattouf to keep a low profile on socials & not post anything controversial.
Ms Green spoke again with Ahern, to seek clarification on what she should say to Lattouf. Words mentioned were "Gaza", "don't give ammunition" & "best keep a low profile".
Mr Melkman wrote to Oliver-Taylorr & Ahern at 2.53pm to give initial advice, that the ABC take a reasonable approach, since Lattouf's contract was only for a week. He also questioned the likelihood that she would speak about Gaza on air that week.
Oliver-Taylor says he considered these factors. Ahern also wrote to O-T. He spoke about how Lattouf was chosen, on the basis of ABC's diversity program. He also spoke about her socials activity & likelihood that she would speak about Gaza on air.
There followed the conversation between Ms Green and Lattouf. Green then emailed a colleague to inform on what she had said to Lattouf, about not posing anything controversial on social media.
It was also acknowledged that Lattouf would not speak on air about Israel-Palestine, since the program was about something else.
It was agreed that Lattouf would continue her show.
Oliver-Taylor was concerned about what Lattouf was posting on socials; that she may be in conflict with ABC editorial policy regarding partiality. He asked that the matter be investigated immediately.
Ms Green was asked for feedback & called to meeting. At 2.03pm on Dec 18, same day as Lattouf's 1st show, Green called Mr Ahern & they discussed the matter.
A decision was made to ask Lattouf to keep a low profile on socials & not post anything controversial.
Ms Green spoke again with Ahern, to seek clarification on what she should say to Lattouf. Words mentioned were "Gaza", "don't give ammunition" & "best keep a low profile".
Mr Melkman wrote to Oliver-Taylorr & Ahern at 2.53pm to give initial advice, that the ABC take a reasonable approach, since Lattouf's contract was only for a week. He also questioned the likelihood that she would speak about Gaza on air that week.
Oliver-Taylor says he considered these factors. Ahern also wrote to O-T. He spoke about how Lattouf was chosen, on the basis of ABC's diversity program. He also spoke about her socials activity & likelihood that she would speak about Gaza on air.
There followed the conversation between Ms Green and Lattouf. Green then emailed a colleague to inform on what she had said to Lattouf, about not posing anything controversial on social media.
It was also acknowledged that Lattouf would not speak on air about Israel-Palestine, since the program was about something else.
It was agreed that Lattouf would continue her show.
Judge asks for clarification on the ABC policy of partiality. Asks about "perception of impartiality" & is referred to Melkman's affidavit.
Judge: So this is the opinion of Melkman?
ABC: he was the subject matter expert.
Judge: What is the meaning of content-maker? Lattouf was the presenter, right?
ABC: Yes, now returning to the chronology. On the first day of Lattouf's show it was agreed that she would continue throughout the week to the end of her contract.
Judge: What's meant by personal use of social media guidelines? Is that part of editorial policy?
ABC refers him back to Melkman affidavit. Judge seems to be reading every word...
Judge: So this is the opinion of Melkman?
ABC: he was the subject matter expert.
Judge: What is the meaning of content-maker? Lattouf was the presenter, right?
ABC: Yes, now returning to the chronology. On the first day of Lattouf's show it was agreed that she would continue throughout the week to the end of her contract.
Judge: What's meant by personal use of social media guidelines? Is that part of editorial policy?
ABC refers him back to Melkman affidavit. Judge seems to be reading every word...
@antoinette_news ABC: Your Honour, you asked about what a content maker is. The definition, under the enterprise agreement, includes all functions inherent in the commissioning, gathering, production, and presentation, delivery & management of content & content-related services".
ABC: Back to the chronology... Mr Oliver-Taylor's email to Mr Anderson at 4.07pm on Dec 18 concludes the matter and ends any influence letters of complaint may have had.
It had been appreciated that complaints were not made in relation to anything Lattouf had said on air, but the choice of presenter.
A scan of Lattouf's socials was done & then a decision was made to keep her to the end of her contract.
That evening, at 8.44pm Mr Anderson sent a text to Oliver-Tayor. "We have an Antoinette issue. Her socials are full of anti-semitic hatred. I'll send you a link. I'm not sure we can have someone on air that suggests Hamas should return to their ethnic cleansing in Gaza & move on to the West Bank".
This refers to an ironic post Lattouf made, referenced already in the proceedings, and apparently misunderstood by Anderson. Lattouf testified: "I was being cheeky".
It had been appreciated that complaints were not made in relation to anything Lattouf had said on air, but the choice of presenter.
A scan of Lattouf's socials was done & then a decision was made to keep her to the end of her contract.
That evening, at 8.44pm Mr Anderson sent a text to Oliver-Tayor. "We have an Antoinette issue. Her socials are full of anti-semitic hatred. I'll send you a link. I'm not sure we can have someone on air that suggests Hamas should return to their ethnic cleansing in Gaza & move on to the West Bank".
This refers to an ironic post Lattouf made, referenced already in the proceedings, and apparently misunderstood by Anderson. Lattouf testified: "I was being cheeky".
ABC: Oliver-Tayor replies: We'll check socials [again]. The ironic post by Lattouf, where she obviously meant Israel [re ethnic cleansing, and not Hamas] was disseminated to decision-makers at ABC.
Oliver-Taylor sends message to Anderson at 8.55pm saying: "I think this is hugely problematic".
O-T sends group message saying: "I think we have a problem".
Reply asked if she should be taken off-air immediately. O-T says not tomorrow. let's carefully review.
Anderson: It's a repetitional issue. The perception of impartiality is as important as adherence to editorial policy (on air).
Judge: Who says: "Likely she gets pulled off air after tomorrow's shift?
ABC: More of Lattouf's SM activity was shared after decision to keep her on air to the end of the week.
Later on the evening of Dec 18 Lattouf wrote to Ms Green, who forwarded this to Mr Ahern. Ahern said AL's posts were difficult but not enough to take her off air. One post however, he said, goes too far.
Oliver-Taylor sends message to Anderson at 8.55pm saying: "I think this is hugely problematic".
O-T sends group message saying: "I think we have a problem".
Reply asked if she should be taken off-air immediately. O-T says not tomorrow. let's carefully review.
Anderson: It's a repetitional issue. The perception of impartiality is as important as adherence to editorial policy (on air).
Judge: Who says: "Likely she gets pulled off air after tomorrow's shift?
ABC: More of Lattouf's SM activity was shared after decision to keep her on air to the end of the week.
Later on the evening of Dec 18 Lattouf wrote to Ms Green, who forwarded this to Mr Ahern. Ahern said AL's posts were difficult but not enough to take her off air. One post however, he said, goes too far.
ABC: Mr Ahern asks for explanation about one post by AL that "goes too far".
Acting editorial director Melkman was tasked by Oliver-Taylor to work with Mr Ahern.
Reference is made to a collation of fan-mail with AL's best come-backs.
Judge: Is that the one that went too far?
ABC: Correct
Anderson: Not what we would like a prominent presenter to post but insufficient to take her off air. We should not over-react. She would make this a very public issue. We should be mindful of how this might play out.
Oliver-Taylor: Let's carefully think things through.
That's where things stood at the end of Dec 18, 2023.
Next day at 6.51am Ahern writes to Green advising not to challenge AL on problematic post.
10.58am Dec 19: Group meeting ensues. See Latimer's affidavit. Latimer directs Ahern to direct AL not to post anything on social media.
Melkman at 11.10am on Dec 19: I have not detected any breach of our personal use social media guidelines. No justification for pulling her off air.
Suggestion: We should ask AL to keep a low profile on social media this week.
At 11am on Dec 19 a weekly meeting had taken place between ABC director Ita Buttrose & Anderson, where she mentions complaints she had been receiving.
At 11.19am receives group email. O-T says the consensus is that AL should not be pulled off air at this time. Anderson accepts this advice & informs his conversation with Buttrose.
Acting editorial director Melkman was tasked by Oliver-Taylor to work with Mr Ahern.
Reference is made to a collation of fan-mail with AL's best come-backs.
Judge: Is that the one that went too far?
ABC: Correct
Anderson: Not what we would like a prominent presenter to post but insufficient to take her off air. We should not over-react. She would make this a very public issue. We should be mindful of how this might play out.
Oliver-Taylor: Let's carefully think things through.
That's where things stood at the end of Dec 18, 2023.
Next day at 6.51am Ahern writes to Green advising not to challenge AL on problematic post.
10.58am Dec 19: Group meeting ensues. See Latimer's affidavit. Latimer directs Ahern to direct AL not to post anything on social media.
Melkman at 11.10am on Dec 19: I have not detected any breach of our personal use social media guidelines. No justification for pulling her off air.
Suggestion: We should ask AL to keep a low profile on social media this week.
At 11am on Dec 19 a weekly meeting had taken place between ABC director Ita Buttrose & Anderson, where she mentions complaints she had been receiving.
At 11.19am receives group email. O-T says the consensus is that AL should not be pulled off air at this time. Anderson accepts this advice & informs his conversation with Buttrose.
ABC: There is no doubt that Anderson was prompted by complaints to take a look at AL's socials but the decision on Dec 19 was to keep her on air.
Ahern & Green spoke again, and Green spoke with AL on Dec 19. Green's 2nd affidavit & final note deals with this subject.
Group email at 1.15pm Dec 19 covers all to date. Green has asked AL not to post about Israel-Gaza this week.
O-T meets with colleagues to discuss AL that evening. His affadivit mentions & Melkman's confirms, agreement was made on the response that would be given to complaints.
8.40pm: Buttrose forwards complaint from member of the public to Anderson.
9.26pm: Anderson replies to ABC Chair Buttrose that it was agreed AL should be kept until the end of her contract on Friday 22nd Dec.
Confirmation by others late that night that ABC should "hold the position" not to take AL off air.
Ahern & Green spoke again, and Green spoke with AL on Dec 19. Green's 2nd affidavit & final note deals with this subject.
Group email at 1.15pm Dec 19 covers all to date. Green has asked AL not to post about Israel-Gaza this week.
O-T meets with colleagues to discuss AL that evening. His affadivit mentions & Melkman's confirms, agreement was made on the response that would be given to complaints.
8.40pm: Buttrose forwards complaint from member of the public to Anderson.
9.26pm: Anderson replies to ABC Chair Buttrose that it was agreed AL should be kept until the end of her contract on Friday 22nd Dec.
Confirmation by others late that night that ABC should "hold the position" not to take AL off air.
Anderson on morning Dec 20 2023, sends Buttrose email admitting ABC's mistake to have employed Lattouf without looking at her prior social media communications. Acknowledges issue of repetitional damage to ABC. Says we have concluded it best to keep her until the end of the week, during which she should not post about the Israel-Gaza conflict.
Whole focus is damage to ABC reputation.
Applicant AL presumes all of the documents that were passed among ABC executives were mendacious.
Buttrose replies to Anderson at 11am to thank him.
That was the "dead end" of this affair at this stage.
Whole focus is damage to ABC reputation.
Applicant AL presumes all of the documents that were passed among ABC executives were mendacious.
Buttrose replies to Anderson at 11am to thank him.
That was the "dead end" of this affair at this stage.
ABC: Another email on Dec 20 questions what is to be done after the conclusion of Lattouf's contract.
Then Lattouf's @hrw post was noticed and bought to the attention of Oliver-Taylor. Group meeting ensues with Latimer, Ahern & Melkman. Green later joined and left, then Oliver-Taylor joined. All have given evidence about this meeting.
O-T details statements & decision taken by him in that meeting.
We submit that O-T's decision, in consultation with others including Melkman, was rational.
Then Lattouf's @hrw post was noticed and bought to the attention of Oliver-Taylor. Group meeting ensues with Latimer, Ahern & Melkman. Green later joined and left, then Oliver-Taylor joined. All have given evidence about this meeting.
O-T details statements & decision taken by him in that meeting.
We submit that O-T's decision, in consultation with others including Melkman, was rational.
On Thursday Dec 21, Oliver-Taylor writes a "file note" (email to self). The evidence is that this was compiled over a period of time.
There was a discussion about how the decision would be put into effect. Ahern was to meet with Lattouf & dismiss her.
O-T tried unsuccessfully to communicate decision to Anderson via phone, who was at lunch with Buttrose. Said he was going to action this now, "try and beat the story".
When Anderson saw O-T's comms he called him.
Meanwhile, at about 1,30pm, meeting is underway between Ahern & Lattouf where she is dismissed.
Ms Green documents what happened at her subsequent meeting with Lattouf.
Judge: Where is the statement made by O-T to The Australian?
ABC: Journalist from The Australian had sent email to Sophie Ellsworth at ABC on Wed 20th around 11am. [Before Lattouf was informed of her dismissal?]
We have discovered this & I tender a copy.
No objection from AL lawyer.
Lattouf lawyer asks for 10.45am tomorrow. Agreed.
Court adjourned for lunch.
There was a discussion about how the decision would be put into effect. Ahern was to meet with Lattouf & dismiss her.
O-T tried unsuccessfully to communicate decision to Anderson via phone, who was at lunch with Buttrose. Said he was going to action this now, "try and beat the story".
When Anderson saw O-T's comms he called him.
Meanwhile, at about 1,30pm, meeting is underway between Ahern & Lattouf where she is dismissed.
Ms Green documents what happened at her subsequent meeting with Lattouf.
Judge: Where is the statement made by O-T to The Australian?
ABC: Journalist from The Australian had sent email to Sophie Ellsworth at ABC on Wed 20th around 11am. [Before Lattouf was informed of her dismissal?]
We have discovered this & I tender a copy.
No objection from AL lawyer.
Lattouf lawyer asks for 10.45am tomorrow. Agreed.
Court adjourned for lunch.
@antoinette_news @hrw ABC asks judge to look at written submissions. The ABC does not deny the existence of any race. AL has just failed to provide any evidence that this issue was at play in this matter.
Lattouf lawyer: calls Mr Anderson, MD of the ABC. Key duties: ensure statutory obligations are met.
Lattouf lawyer: Buck stops with you regarding editorial decisions?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Define the term "managed exit:
A: it involves all risk being mitigated
Lattouf lawyer: Are employee relation within your responsibility?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: And should all 4500 employees be aware of ABC rules.
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: What falls under enterprise agreement and are there other rules that fall outside.
A: All are communicated
Lattouf lawyer: Do all staff adhere to ABC rules?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Do you consider yourself personally bound?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Your responsibility is to promote adherence.
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Let's speak about Cloause 55 of the Enterprise agreement & Code of Conduct. Both talk about disobeying reasonable and lawful direction. Should staff and managers understand the meaning of those words.
A: Yes:
Lattouf lawyer: No ambiguity? No difference between direction and suggestion, and advice?
A: What is editorial responsibility? Definition says it relates to preparing material for publication.
Editorial director sets and informs staff about policy.
Lattouf lawyer reading network definition. Do you recall if Mr Melkman was editorial director at the time in question?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: So he would know what he's talking about. Reads details of job description. So policy relates to broadcast content.
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Buck stops with you regarding editorial decisions?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Define the term "managed exit:
A: it involves all risk being mitigated
Lattouf lawyer: Are employee relation within your responsibility?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: And should all 4500 employees be aware of ABC rules.
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: What falls under enterprise agreement and are there other rules that fall outside.
A: All are communicated
Lattouf lawyer: Do all staff adhere to ABC rules?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Do you consider yourself personally bound?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Your responsibility is to promote adherence.
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Let's speak about Cloause 55 of the Enterprise agreement & Code of Conduct. Both talk about disobeying reasonable and lawful direction. Should staff and managers understand the meaning of those words.
A: Yes:
Lattouf lawyer: No ambiguity? No difference between direction and suggestion, and advice?
A: What is editorial responsibility? Definition says it relates to preparing material for publication.
Editorial director sets and informs staff about policy.
Lattouf lawyer reading network definition. Do you recall if Mr Melkman was editorial director at the time in question?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: So he would know what he's talking about. Reads details of job description. So policy relates to broadcast content.
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer to ABC staffer Mr Anderson: I want to ask about some paragraphs in your affidavit.
You refer to the ABC act and then move on to the concept of impartiality. You extract certain parts of the policy, tell me about the part about objectivity and impartiality. Where does that come from?
Our training material and website/
Lattouf lawyer: You refer to the statutory obligation for objectivity, accuracy and impartiality as it is defined in the ABC Act. Is it actually defined?
A: Well maybe not fully defined.
Lattouf lawyer: Within the realm of impartiality there is mention of diversity of perspectives, rule of law and freedom of speech. Is that right?
A: Yes...
Lattouf lawyer: And the independence of the ABC & its staff?
A: Yes:, so there should be no interference.
Lattouf lawyer: There is acknowledgement that ABC content may ruffle feathers?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: It's not against ABC policy to broadcast content that may cause offence?
A: There's a harm clause but essentially yes. We have a policy to present a diversity of perspectives, so that no section of the community is excluded or disproportionately represented.
Lattouf lawyer: But there are certain perspectives that will not be represented, such as Nazi perspectives?
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: Do you agree that there is a delineation between editorial policies & personal conduct?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: A clear delineation?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: So the person responsible for editorial policies would be aware of the scope of these policies?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: So personal social media does not fall within the scope of "EdPols"? ABC does not take responsibility for social media content?
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: There are nevertheless factors relating to personal SM us, that it should not undermine the independence & impartiality of the ABC. Examples are given here. How do these rules play out in practice? It's about a staff member's role AT the ABC.
A: It's also about our reputation. If someone has demonstrated the opposite of impartiality on social media.
Lattouf lawyer: expert advice says a presenter's personal view should not exclude them from working at the ABC. Like if they supported a particular football team or political party.
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: Is it a useful example of a presenter expressing a person view on a contentious issue, to cite that as a breach?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Don't rules relate to content that directly relates to the subject matter they present on air. I'm suggesting the ABC has no authority to regulate personal social media use when it does not relate to what the presenter is discussing on air.
A: There is also the question of the ABC reputation
Lattouf lawyer: Is there an ABC rule that forbids a presenter from expressing a view, past or present, with which a sector of the community might disagree, or which is not "incontrovertible"?
Lattouf lawyer: Is this article, published by ABC problematic? More or less problematic than the @hrw post on the same issue?
You refer to the ABC act and then move on to the concept of impartiality. You extract certain parts of the policy, tell me about the part about objectivity and impartiality. Where does that come from?
Our training material and website/
Lattouf lawyer: You refer to the statutory obligation for objectivity, accuracy and impartiality as it is defined in the ABC Act. Is it actually defined?
A: Well maybe not fully defined.
Lattouf lawyer: Within the realm of impartiality there is mention of diversity of perspectives, rule of law and freedom of speech. Is that right?
A: Yes...
Lattouf lawyer: And the independence of the ABC & its staff?
A: Yes:, so there should be no interference.
Lattouf lawyer: There is acknowledgement that ABC content may ruffle feathers?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: It's not against ABC policy to broadcast content that may cause offence?
A: There's a harm clause but essentially yes. We have a policy to present a diversity of perspectives, so that no section of the community is excluded or disproportionately represented.
Lattouf lawyer: But there are certain perspectives that will not be represented, such as Nazi perspectives?
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: Do you agree that there is a delineation between editorial policies & personal conduct?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: A clear delineation?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: So the person responsible for editorial policies would be aware of the scope of these policies?
A: yes
Lattouf lawyer: So personal social media does not fall within the scope of "EdPols"? ABC does not take responsibility for social media content?
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: There are nevertheless factors relating to personal SM us, that it should not undermine the independence & impartiality of the ABC. Examples are given here. How do these rules play out in practice? It's about a staff member's role AT the ABC.
A: It's also about our reputation. If someone has demonstrated the opposite of impartiality on social media.
Lattouf lawyer: expert advice says a presenter's personal view should not exclude them from working at the ABC. Like if they supported a particular football team or political party.
A: Correct
Lattouf lawyer: Is it a useful example of a presenter expressing a person view on a contentious issue, to cite that as a breach?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Don't rules relate to content that directly relates to the subject matter they present on air. I'm suggesting the ABC has no authority to regulate personal social media use when it does not relate to what the presenter is discussing on air.
A: There is also the question of the ABC reputation
Lattouf lawyer: Is there an ABC rule that forbids a presenter from expressing a view, past or present, with which a sector of the community might disagree, or which is not "incontrovertible"?
Lattouf lawyer: Is this article, published by ABC problematic? More or less problematic than the @hrw post on the same issue?
Lattouf lawyer to ABC staffer Mr Anderson: Is illegal of ABC to not follow its own policies?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Do you agree that it is misconduct for an employee to disobey a lawful and reasonable direction?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: And that would also be true of an inadvertent failure to comply?
A: my understanding is about wilful disobedience.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you have any concerns about the decision made by Oliver-Taylor about AL? Was it a competent decision?
A: He's a competent leader but he could have benefitted from other advice.
Lattouf lawyer: he could have had a discussion with Ms Lattouf?
A: yes but it might not have changed the outcome?
Lattouf lawyer: But isn't it the bleeding obvious that with a decision that will affect their employment, don't they have the right to a discussion?
A: O-T made the decision that was within his purview and I was convinced that it was done because she had breached a direction.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you have some doubt as to whether O-T's decision was lawful and reasonable?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: I put to you that the ABC is guilty of misconduct because an employee is entitled to be heard in her own defence. Was this atypical treatment of an employee?
A: Yes
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: Do you agree that it is misconduct for an employee to disobey a lawful and reasonable direction?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer: And that would also be true of an inadvertent failure to comply?
A: my understanding is about wilful disobedience.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you have any concerns about the decision made by Oliver-Taylor about AL? Was it a competent decision?
A: He's a competent leader but he could have benefitted from other advice.
Lattouf lawyer: he could have had a discussion with Ms Lattouf?
A: yes but it might not have changed the outcome?
Lattouf lawyer: But isn't it the bleeding obvious that with a decision that will affect their employment, don't they have the right to a discussion?
A: O-T made the decision that was within his purview and I was convinced that it was done because she had breached a direction.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you have some doubt as to whether O-T's decision was lawful and reasonable?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: I put to you that the ABC is guilty of misconduct because an employee is entitled to be heard in her own defence. Was this atypical treatment of an employee?
A: Yes
Lattouf lawyer to ABC staffer Anderson: Do you ever lie to or mislead the board of the ABC or its Chair?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: One of the jobs of "Culture Team" is to monitor employee behaviour. Their role is way below your pay grade. Do you often engage in this activity?
A: In exceptional circumstances I might.
Lattouf lawyer: It's an ABC rule that a presenter not appear to be impartial on a contentious issue?
A: Yes, but it depends on what issue. I'd be concerned on some issues
Lattouf lawyer: But the reality is that ABC presenters make "partial" statements all the time and they are not sanctioned.
A: Yes, I'd be concerned about the extent to which these statements might undermine the ABC's impartiality.
Lattouf lawyer: I say the ABC has no rule regarding the perception of their employees' impartiality.
A: If their public statements are problematic we will look into it.
Lattouf lawyer: Some employees have made contentious statements and you have done nothing about it. Lattouf can not so so but Laura Tingle can?
A: I can't make a general statement about Tingle.
Lattouf lawyer goes through a range of statements, asking Anderson whether they are partial or impartial, including the statement: "Australia is a racist country and always has been" [made by Laura Tingle].
Anderson says this is an impartial statement because there is basis in fact.
Lattouf lawyer: So whether certain people would disagree with that statement does not affect whether it is impartial or not? Was Laura Tingle take off air.
A: No, but she was counseled. I believe she was undermining her effectivity on air.
Lattouf lawyer: Tingle has made statements that reflect partiality & has not been sanctioned at all.
Is the statement "Israel kills journalists" impartial?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: One of the jobs of "Culture Team" is to monitor employee behaviour. Their role is way below your pay grade. Do you often engage in this activity?
A: In exceptional circumstances I might.
Lattouf lawyer: It's an ABC rule that a presenter not appear to be impartial on a contentious issue?
A: Yes, but it depends on what issue. I'd be concerned on some issues
Lattouf lawyer: But the reality is that ABC presenters make "partial" statements all the time and they are not sanctioned.
A: Yes, I'd be concerned about the extent to which these statements might undermine the ABC's impartiality.
Lattouf lawyer: I say the ABC has no rule regarding the perception of their employees' impartiality.
A: If their public statements are problematic we will look into it.
Lattouf lawyer: Some employees have made contentious statements and you have done nothing about it. Lattouf can not so so but Laura Tingle can?
A: I can't make a general statement about Tingle.
Lattouf lawyer goes through a range of statements, asking Anderson whether they are partial or impartial, including the statement: "Australia is a racist country and always has been" [made by Laura Tingle].
Anderson says this is an impartial statement because there is basis in fact.
Lattouf lawyer: So whether certain people would disagree with that statement does not affect whether it is impartial or not? Was Laura Tingle take off air.
A: No, but she was counseled. I believe she was undermining her effectivity on air.
Lattouf lawyer: Tingle has made statements that reflect partiality & has not been sanctioned at all.
Is the statement "Israel kills journalists" impartial?
Conversation with judge. Lattouf lawyer says he is attempting to understand to the senior ABC employee what the broadcaster means by impartial, given some presenters can get away with it and others can't.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you know Paul Barry, that he tweeted: "Israel is killing journalists"?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: Paul Barry was not taken off air for tweeting this on his person al account.
Lattouf lawyer cites more examples of presenters' comments that were not sanctioned, about which Anderson claims to be only vaguely aware.
Lattouf lawyer asks Anderson about hit pieces written about ABC journalists by the Murdoch press. Did ABC head Kim Williams say the Murdoch obsession with ABC journalists is unbalanced and unhinged?
A: I don't know.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you recall ABC journalist John Lyons talking about campaigns being mounted against his colleagues. Were his statements contentious and impartial?
Judge asks Anderson to leave the court and an agreement made on a more specific line of questioning.
Lattouf lawyer goes through a range of statements made by prominent journalist, asking if they could be perceived as not impartial. All answers are yes.
Lattouf lawyer asks Anderson if any of these journalists have been removed from air. All answers are no.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you know Paul Barry, that he tweeted: "Israel is killing journalists"?
A: No
Lattouf lawyer: Paul Barry was not taken off air for tweeting this on his person al account.
Lattouf lawyer cites more examples of presenters' comments that were not sanctioned, about which Anderson claims to be only vaguely aware.
Lattouf lawyer asks Anderson about hit pieces written about ABC journalists by the Murdoch press. Did ABC head Kim Williams say the Murdoch obsession with ABC journalists is unbalanced and unhinged?
A: I don't know.
Lattouf lawyer: Do you recall ABC journalist John Lyons talking about campaigns being mounted against his colleagues. Were his statements contentious and impartial?
Judge asks Anderson to leave the court and an agreement made on a more specific line of questioning.
Lattouf lawyer goes through a range of statements made by prominent journalist, asking if they could be perceived as not impartial. All answers are yes.
Lattouf lawyer asks Anderson if any of these journalists have been removed from air. All answers are no.
Lattouf lawyer to ABC staffer Anderson. You said Tingle was not sanctioned for saying "Australia is a racist country". We can put to bed the idea that ABC presenters making partial statements will always be sanctioned.
A: It depends on the context.
Lattouf lawyer: Will you tender (named) documents to the Senate Standing Committee?
A: Yes.
Court adjourned until 10.45am tomorrow.
Judge confirms Anderson is available.
A: It depends on the context.
Lattouf lawyer: Will you tender (named) documents to the Senate Standing Committee?
A: Yes.
Court adjourned until 10.45am tomorrow.
Judge confirms Anderson is available.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
