GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG

ISSUE – NO. 779

19 June 2026

* * * *

* * * *

The Latest

  • Malcolm Turnbull – the financial (failure) man from snowy river

There was enormous interest in Media Watch Dog on 6 June when the following comment was made:

Malcolm Turnbull is much loved by the ABC and Nine primarily because he is a former Liberal Party leader who criticises the Liberal Party. Perhaps this is why he is rarely asked such tough questions as:

▪ Mr Turnbull, do you believe you should be telling the Liberal Party what to do – in view of the fact that you ran a dreadful campaign in the 2016 election and lost 14 seats to the Labor Party?

▪ Mr Turnbull, you were a driving force in the creation of Snowy Hydro 2.0 scheme which is running years over its scheduled conclusion time and is said to be in line to cost $42 billion after being estimated at costing $2 billion. What do you have to say about this?

There is all the more reason to ask Malcolm Turnbull the second question following the report by Colin Packham in The Australian on 19 June 2026 titled “Auditor blasts Snowy failures”. This is how the report commenced:

Snowy Hydro failed to effectively manage contractors and address the underlying problems that forced the cost of Snowy 2.0 to almost double to $12bn in 2023, a damning Auditor-General report has found. The Australian National Audit Office has concluded the government-owned company had been only “partly effective” in managing the project, finding it had failed to effectively hold contractors to account and was unable to reliably forecast the final cost of the nation’s largest renewable energy development. The findings strike at the centre of Snowy Hydro’s defence of the project.

While the company has repeatedly pointed to contractor performance, difficult geology, labour shortages and inflation as key causes of the project’s troubles, the Auditor-General found governance weaknesses, poor risk management and inadequate project controls persisted after the project’s $12bn reset.

MWD would very much like to ascertain Mr Turnbull’s current position on the Snowy Hydro 2.0. After all, as prime minister he was personally involved in initiating and supporting the renewables project – even to the extent of visiting the planned site as prime minister, along with a media contingent. Now, a decade later, Snowy Hydro management does not have a clue when it will be completed or what will be the ultimate cost.

The financial disaster that is Snowy Hydro is a matter of huge interest to Australian taxpayers. Here’s hoping that the next time Malcolm Turnbull rocks up (perhaps in his leather jacket) at an ABC studio to fang the Liberal Party, an ABC journalist will ask him some questions about what happened on his watch with respect to Snowy Hydro 2.0, when he was Liberal Party prime minister. But don’t hold your breath – as the saying goes.

  • Cian Hussey looks into his crystal ball and discovers who Robert Menzies, who died half a century ago, would vote for today

Ellie’s (male) co-owner is sometimes asked “What would Sir Robert Menzies be like if he were alive today?” To which the answer is “A very old man.” After all, Robert Menzies, who formed the Liberal Party of Australia in late 1944, was born in 1894.

Alas, it would seem that Cian Hussey, has not been involved in such a conversation. How else to explain his article in The Daily Telegraph on 19 June headed: “Would Sir Bob have been a One Nation man? You bet.” Your man Hussey presents as a research fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs and writes No Permanent Solutions on Substack.

Now, Sir Robert died in May 1978 – which is nearly half a century ago. Nobody can say with any authority how he would have responded to Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party.

Hussey cites a statement made in 1965 by Menzies when he rejected the economic plan drawn up by an advisory body. Here it is:

If Sir Robert Menzies were alive, he would probably vote for One Nation. Australia’s longest-serving prime minister would not recognise the party which he founded, given it abandoned long ago his cherished values of liberalism, patriotism, and democracy.

Menzies was an ardent democrat. In 1965 a major survey of the Australian economy was released which recommended a number of policy reforms including the establishment of a number of independent advisory councils. In his famous response to this report, Menzies set out why liberals cannot blindly listen to experts and hand power over to unelected bureaucrats and “independent” bodies.

If Australia’s democratic system, based upon the consent of a free community, is to be maintained, Menzies argued, then “no government can hand over to bodies outside the government the choice of objectives and the means of attaining them”. If questions of public policy were handed over to such independent bodies then “democracy would have ceased and a technocracy would have begun.”….

Menzies would have abhorred the kind of technocratic managerialism which has beset the Liberal Party in recent years. When Scott Morrison said that freedom of speech “doesn’t create one job”, for example, Menzies might have responded (as he said at the time) that “policy in a democratic community does not depend upon purely economic considerations.”

It would appear that Hussey is referring to The Report of the Committee of Economic Inquiry in Australia – commonly known as The Vernon Report. The Menzies government, wisely, did not accept the report – with its recommendation that an economic advisory body be established to determine economic policy and planning. That was six decades ago and is totally unrelated to contemporary Australian politics with respect to either the Liberal Party or One Nation.

Likewise, Scott Morrison’s statement that a reform of human rights legislation doesn’t change one job. It had nothing to do with economic policy.

Hussey concluded his article as follows:

Menzies had a clear conception of what liberalism was, and it was not technocracy, expert rule, multiculturalism, cultural deregulation, and state command over the economy. On balance, One Nation better embodies this conception of liberalism than the modern Liberal Party does. Menzies voted for the Democratic Labor Party instead of the Liberal Party at least twice. If he were alive today, One Nation would surely get his vote.

What a load of absolute tosh. As Gerard Henderson documents in his book Santamaria: A Most Unusual Man (MUP, 2015), Menzies became disillusioned with the Liberal Party under the leadership of William McMahon and Bill Snedden. He gave his primary vote to the DLP and his second preference to the Liberal Party in the early 1970s. The DLP was primarily focused on thwarting Communist Party influence within the labour movement. When Malcolm Fraser became Liberal Party leader in 1975, Menzies resumed voting for the Liberal Party. The DLP was formally wound up in 1976.

Sure, Menzies was a political conservative by the standard of his time. But it is ahistorical to state that he would support Pauline Hanson today rather than Angus Taylor or Matt Canavan.

  • The Guardian Australia’s Sarah Martin throws the switch to ignoramus with her question to Pauline Hanson

The journalistic left was at its counter-productive best – or worst – when Senator Pauline Hanson addressed the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday. Early on, the left-wing GetUp! organisation produced a stunt by unfurling a protest banner while Hanson was delivering her speech. This had the unintended consequence of confirming the Senator’s long-held view that the media is hostile to One Nation – along with that of her supporters.

Then, towards the Q&A period, The Guardian Australia’s senior correspondent Sarah Martin asked this question and received a predictable result:

Sarah Martin: Senator Hanson, Sarah Martin from The Guardian. Taxpayers are paying more than $150,000 a year for your daughter, Lee Hanson, to seemingly campaign full-time in Tasmania while employed as a political adviser for a New South Wales senator. Did you have any role in appointing her to that position?

Pauline Hanson: Honestly, you never give up. I’ve never seen a person that’s such a trashy journalist, you know. And what you put out all the time, you’ve got this obsession with constantly trying to pull down myself, my party, or Mrs Rinehart…

Pauline Hanson went on to say that she did not get her daughter, who has run as a One Nation candidate in Tasmania, the job and defended the appointment. The exchange continued:

Sarah Martin: …So, to clarify, you had no role in appointing her to that position, none whatsoever?

Pauline Hanson: I’ve given you my answer. Thank you.

As a Canberra political correspondent, Martin should know that quite a few political staffers do not live in the same state as their employer. Senator Hanson knew this – and mentioned to Tom Connell, the National Press Club’s president, that a former Adelaide-based Liberal Party senator’s chief-of-staff lived in Tasmania.

So, the leftist Guardian Australia’s senior correspondent asked a hostile, personal question to Hanson which was based on apparent ignorance.

There were many aspects of the One Nation leader’s address to the National Press Gallery which warranted additional information or implied critical analysis. However, Comrade Martin, of the avowedly leftist Guardian Australia, threw the switch to the Hanson family – much to the delight of the Pauline Hanson Fan Club. Which raises the question – How counterproductive can a Guardian journalist be? And here’s another question: Can You Bear It?

  • Steve Carey ignores the fact that Sarah Martin did not ask Pauline Hanson a question about policy

On Thursday 18 June, Steve Carey – a former journalist – who presents as a media specialist and is the founder of Max and Comms – appeared on the ABC TV News Breakfast Newspapers segment. He was interviewed by Emma Reballato and James Glenday.

Invited to comment about the Martin/Hanson exchange the previous day at the National Press Club, Carey had this to say:

Steve Carey:  It’s a typical inflammatory kind of crash or crash-through kind of attitude from Pauline, and that’s what we’ve come to expect. I think what concerns me more than anything is that she’s using that as a way to obfuscate other things. So her idea of attacking a journalist and the journalist having to sit there is very much out of the Donald Trump playbook, and we’ve seen that play out in the [United] States. And the danger is that it takes you away from the key issue. And the key issues here are her policies.

Quite so. It’s just that the self-proclaimed media specialist did not focus on One Nation’s policies – or lack of same – in a 7-minute appearance on News Breakfast. Instead there was a pile-on as James agreed with Steve and Steve agreed with Emma who agreed with Steve who agreed with himself in criticising the One Nation leader. In passing, James Glenday described Sarah Martin as a “very good journalist”.

Note that, in a condescending way, Steve Carey initially referred to Senator Hanson as “Pauline”. Moreover, as pointed out, Sarah Martin did not ask the One Nation leader a question about policy. Rather she asked a personal question about Hanson’s daughter which was devoid of policy depth. And your man Glenday reckoned that this was an example of “good journalism”. Can You Bear It?

  • Sally Sara’s howler on capital gains when interviewing Barnaby Joyce

On 15 June, One Nation MP Barnaby Joyce was interviewed by Sally Sara on ABC Radio National Breakfast. Joyce is a qualified accountant. Sally Sara, his interviewer, is not.

Early in the interview, Joyce criticised the Albanese Labor government’s decision to increase the Capital Gains Tax in certain circumstances from 30 per cent to 47 per cent. The following exchange took place. Let’s go to the transcript:

Barnaby Joyce: They [Labor] have certainly been able to spend the money, they just haven’t been able to earn the money. And now, panic stations, they’ve gone out and found people who have been prudent, put money aside rather than spending it on trifles and going on holidays. They actually put money aside to build capital assets. And [Labor has] said, because you’re prudent, we’re going to take half your money off you, and that has –

Sally Sara: [interjecting] Is it half?

Barnaby Joyce: Well, it’s 47 per cent is your top marginal tax rate, and if you’re paying that –

Sally Sara: [interjecting] But that doesn’t apply in these cases, does it?

Barnaby Joyce: If you pay, if once you have your, you know, the minimum you pay on your capital gains tax through their words at 30 per cent

Sally Sara: 30.

Barnaby Joyce: And 30 per cent. That’s a minimum, though. So the highest tax rate is, it’s going to be 47, so 47 per cent including the Medicare levy….

Sally Sara: But even social media influencers know that 47 figure is not right, is it?

Barnaby Joyce: But it is right, if your net assets are over $6 million and your turnovers over $2 million. So it is right.

Barnaby Joyce was correct. The $2 million figure has subsequently been increased.

Joyce was a fellow of CPA Australia and ran his own accountancy practice doing work for small and large firms along with multinationals. Sally Sara has no known qualifications in accounting or law. Yet she promoted the work of an anonymous “influencer” to that of a certified accountant. Can You Bear It?

  • Linton Besser focuses only on extreme right-wing anti-Semitism

Last Monday, ABC TV Media Watch presenter Linton Besser devoted most of his program to right-wing extremism – with a focus on anti-Semitism. Initially reference was made to the reaction in Belfast where a refugee from Somalia is alleged to have attempted to behead a local man on a street. Besser focused on the demonstration against the actions of the alleged attacker.

Then Comrade Besser devoted his focus on anti-Semitism to Elon Musk’s X – but not any other social media outlet. Accusing X of “fomenting racist, civil unrest”. Besser said:

Linton Besser: Tonight we’re going to take an in-depth look at X, once the internet’s town square, now a rabble, and bullhorn, wielded by the platform’s owner, the richest man in the world, Elon Musk. Who since 8 June, when the attack occurred, has posted and reposted at least 37 items whipping up fear and anger, and directing his 240 million followers to blame migrants and people of colour:

In a segment which ran for over 12 minutes in a 15-minute program, Besser did not once refer to radical Islam. But he did refer to Christians.

In one instance Besser quoted a post on X by a certain DuxVal who called for a “Reconquista” which Besser described as a “medieval Christian crusade against Islam”. In fact, the Reconquista was not part of the Crusades of the Holy See but backed by Christian groups on the Iberian Peninsula (i.e. modern day Spain and Portugal) to drive Muslims out of the area.

Besser went on to accuse Musk of anti-Semitism – in part because of anti-Semitic material on X. There is reason to be concerned about this. However, a viewer of Media Watch could have come to the view that modern-day anti-Semitism is the preserve of the right. He failed to mention radical Islamists or the radical left as purveyors of anti-Semitism. Can You Bear It?

An ABC TV Insiders Moment

  • In which David Speers does not listen to Cameron Stewart

Ever since David (“Please call me Speersy”) commenced presenting Insiders, Ellie’s (male) co-owner has noticed that he frequently fails to listen to what his interviewees or panellists are saying. MWD assumes that he is too busy working out his next interjection or contribution to do so.

Take, for example, your man Speers’ performance when presenting Insiders on Sunday 14 June. The panel comprised Raf Epstein (ABC), Jennifer Hewett (Australian Financial Review) and Cameron Stewart (The Australian). Let’s go to the transcript when discussion turned on the Labor Party’s attempted class attack on Pauline Hanson for associating with the billionaire Gina Rinehart:

Cameron Stewart: And then, of course, we had a class sort of attack, if you like, on Pauline Hanson, saying, “Look, you know, she listens to Gina Rinehart. She flies on Gina Rinehart’s jet”. So, you can see the Labor Party, like the Liberals, just grasping, if you like, at straws to try and find a way to look at this. But as far as the class attack on Pauline Hanson goes, I think that’s very unlikely to succeed. I mean, if you look at, to say that she is detached from the working Australian. If you look at the story overseas, who won the working class vote in America? A billionaire who builds skyscrapers, who turns up to rallies on a plane with Trump written on it. And who won the working class vote in Britain? Nigel Farage, a multi-millionaire. So, I’m not sure that anger will work.

David Speers: Not to mention Donald Trump is a billionaire and, at least historically, has been able to win support from, you know, the battlers.

How about that? Cameron Stewart did mention that President Trump is a billionaire who has obtained significant support from working-class Americans. It’s just that Speersy wasn’t listening.

  • In which Raf Epstein (falsely) attributes the saying “Fire the Liar” to Peta Credlin

The Insiders discussion continued:

David Speers: On the way One Nation, Raf, has responded to Labor. It’s that fundraising drive, “Fire the Liar”. Now we know that word, liar. Labor used to devastating effect against Scott Morrison, “The Liar from the Shire”, they called him. It is a word that, if it sticks, can be really damaging. What do you make of how One Nation is now going to use this against Anthony Albanese?

Raf Epstein: I don’t want to keep repeating the phrase, but I have to. So, “Fire the Liar”. First of all, is a Peta Credlin line, and One Nation admits that, it’s incredibly powerful…

No, “Fire the Liar” is not really a Peta Credlin slogan, which was adopted with acknowledgment, by One Nation’s James Ashby. This is how the term first ran on Sky News’ Credlin program on Monday 8 June:

Peta Credlin: I have a very clever friend who said: “Forget ‘Ditch the Witch’, ‘Fire the Liar’. No-one can be upset about that, that’s not misogynist.” I love it…it could work for Anthony Albanese.

So there you have it. According to Peta Credlin, the term “Fire the Liar”, with reference to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was suggested to her “by a very clever friend”.

  • In which Speersy & Raf stumble over the details of what Pauline Hanson said to Sharri Markson about radical Islam

On Insiders, a somewhat loquacious Raf Epstein maintained that there is “a role for the media” in drawing attention to Senator Hanson’s comments. Once again, let’s go to the transcript:

Raf Epstein: Just one more thing on One Nation is Pauline Hanson, especially. She is held to a different standard. There is no way on earth –

Jennifer Hewett: But that’s like popularists in –

Raf Epstein: Well, it is, but it’s up – so she can say what she likes. But it’s up to us – and it’s up to other politicians whether or not we grade people differently. She could never say, “Show me the good Jews” [As distinct from good Muslims].

Jennifer Hewett: Yes, but –

Raf Epstein: She could not say. She could not say, “Jews are slowly taking control of Britain and France”. She says that about Muslims. So we are the people in the media who mark her on a different standard. That matters and the Liberal Party –

Jennifer Hewett: Actually, I think people –

Raf Epstein: The Liberal Party mark her on a different standard –

Jennifer Hewett: I think people mark on a different standard. The same way that, you know, Trump could get away with saying things that no other politician could. I actually don’t think the media are nearly as important as you suggest. I think it’s what people respond to –

Raf Epstein: Is that a problem, though?

Jennifer Hewett: Well, it may be a problem. But that’s the reality.

Raf Epstein: And you don’t think there’s a role for the media? So it’s not our job to, we don’t get to say whether or not people get votes, but the way we frame what they say? If she said that about Jews, there’d be a discussion on this couch about whether or not she should be prosecuted under hate laws.

Jennifer Hewett: There’s plenty of discussion in the media.

David Speers: There was plenty of discussion at the time of those comments. But yeah no, take your point.

It’s not clear where Comrade Epstein’s been over the past three decades. Rightly or wrongly, Pauline Hanson has been constantly criticised in the mainstream media – especially on the ABC and SBS plus the Nine Entertainment newspapers – for her alleged racism in general and what Epstein referred to as her “there are no good Muslims” statement in particular. Indeed, the comment was made on Sky News’ Sharri program on 16 February – following which Pauline Hanson backed off somewhat, as the transcript demonstrates:

Pauline Hanson: I tell you what, I’ve got no time for the radical Islam. Their religion concerns me, because what it says in the Quran, we are, they hate Westerners, and that’s what it’s all about. You say, “Oh, well, there’s good Muslims out there”. Well, I’m sorry. How can you, how can you, you know, tell me there are good Muslims? If jihad is ever called, and people must understand this, go and research, go and understand about this, and the ones that will suffer, as those Jews did on that, you know, when they were murdered and slaughtered.

Sharri Markson: Well, Pauline.

Pauline Hanson: And that’s what we’ve got to realise could happen.

Sharri Markson: I mean, there are a lot of moderate Muslims in Australia who, as you put it, good Muslims. But I think we can agree that radical extremist Islam that doesn’t support Australian values has no place here.

Shortly after the interview, Sharri Markson returned to the topic and had this to say:

Sharri Markson: I just want to say, again, this is just coming from me as an Australian Jew, that I don’t support what Pauline Hanson just said. Of course, I believe the vast majority of Australian Muslims do agree with our values, and they do have a place in Australia, and they should be here. And it’s just the vocal minority that support radical Islam, extremist Islam, that are causing problems. And, you know, you’ve seen clips from those groups on Sky News. Even tonight Chris Kenny played some from Sheikh Ibrahim Dadoun. So I just wanted to make that very clear again.

Epstein’s implication that Senator Hanson’s comment about Muslims was not challenged in the media is simply false. For example, the first to challenge Hanson’s statement was Sharri Markson. Comrade Epstein should do more fact-checking.

[Thanks for the documentation. By the way, what was Speersy on about when he said: “There was plenty of discussion at the time of those [Hanson] comments but yeah, no [I] take your point.” What does the comment “Yeah, no” really mean? Does it mean “Yes”? Or does it mean “No”? – or is it meaningless? – MWD Editor.]

Verily, An ABC TV Insiders Moment – or Three.

Travels With Our Laura

Many decades have passed since Ellie’s (male) co-owner read Graham Greene’s 1969 novel Travels With My Aunt. He recalled this when considering what headline to use when commenting on the travels of the ABC Global Affairs Editor Laura Tingle. The taxpayer funded public broadcaster likes to refer to itself as “Our ABC”.

How appropriate, then, that the international movements of its Global Affairs Editor should be called “Travels With Our Laura”.

Media Watch Dog will follow Laura (“Australia is a racist country”) Tingle as she enacts her task of explaining Australia to the world and the world to Australia. (See MWD “A David Marr/Laura Tingle Moment” – Issue 730, 30 May 2025).

  • Laura Tingle returns to Australia after reporting no news of significance from the Middle East

ABC Communications has declined to say whether Laura Tingle, the ABC global affairs editor, had spent time in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank before she went and took up her current role – which includes commenting on Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

In recent times, Comrade Tingle has reported from Dubai and Jerusalem. However, while in Israel, she did not obtain an interview with any significant Israeli political or military leaders or with the Palestinian Authority leaders in Ramallah. In short, Tingle added no value to the ABC journalists already based in Jerusalem. Also, the ABC’s most significant report from Dubai turned on her allegedly being stranded at Dubai airport. Or something like that. See MWD Issue 773

Now back in Australia, Tingle was interviewed by David Marr on Late Night Live on Monday 15 June. The US/Iran war became a bit of a joke as Comrades Marr and Tingle sneered at the United States – but not Iran. Let’s go to the transcript:

David Marr: Do you think Donald, on one of his sleepless nights which seem to be every night, it crosses his mind, he rather regrets going in? What was the…what was it, Operate? – What was the operation called, by the way? Thumping Heart or something?

Laura Tingle: Fury? Something, something. And then, of course, well, somebody said that the Israeli version was Roaring Lion, and somebody was joking about it being sort of Smacked Cat or something now.

David Marr: But now it’s Operation Rebirth.

Laura Tingle: The War of Rebirth, that seems to have been..I’m going to have to Google it afterwards, just to –

David Marr: I’m fascinated by these names. Who makes them up? What, you know, who are the staffers that decide Thor’s Hammer and Thumping Heart…?

How funny is that? Marr and Tingle went on to wonder whether the US/Iran agreement would be signed by Friday. It was signed on Thursday (Australian time).

For the record. The US had only one name for the 2026 US/Iran War – Epic Fury. It referred to the 2025 Twelve Day War as Operation Midnight Hammer. Israel called its 2025 twelve-day war Rising Lion – and Roaring Lion is used for the 2026 conflict. Israel is currently calling the war in Gaza as the War on Redemption. There have been no “Thumping Heart” or “Thor’s Hammer” operations.

By the way, the Marr/Tingle duo did not sneer at Iran’s strikes at Israel which was called Operation True Promise IV and its 2025 attack on Qatar as Operation Glad Tidings of Victory. It was the case of “Don’t mock the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. But feel free to sneer at the US and Israel”. Can You Bear It?

[No. Not really – now that you ask. By the way, the American leftist Bruce Shapiro was interviewed by Comrade Marr on Late Night Left [sic] the following evening. Unlike the Marr/Tingle duo, he did not sneer at the United States or Israel with respect to the current war – even though he is a vehement critic of the governments of the United States and Israel. Rather Shapiro pointed out that Iran also needs an off-ramp to end the current conflict. Unlike the Marr/Tingle duo who did not focus on Iran’s substantial military losses in recent months.- MWD Editor.]

Documentation

  • Senator Pauline Hanson, the media and memory

As avid Media Watch Dog readers know only too well, Gerard Henderson is wont to criticise individuals who believe what they want to believe along with others who have clear “recollections” of events that never happened. The latter matter is discussed in Chapter 11 of Gerard Henderson’s Cardinal Pell, The Media Pile-On & Collective Guilt (Connor Court, third edition, 2023).

One Nation leader Senator Pauline Hanson was interviewed on the Sky News Australia by James Macpherson on The Macpherson Angle. The date was Sunday 7 June. Following discussion about the “Ditch the Witch” campaign being run by a Melbourne brothel owner against Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan (which was condemned by, among others, Victorian Liberal Party leader Jess Wilson) – this is what occurred:

James Macpherson: All right, before I let you go, Senator, there’s a billboard going around Melbourne depicting Victoria’s Labor Premier Jacinta Allan, as a witch. Jacinta Allan has complained on Instagram that the billboard is sexist. She added, “I cannot stand back and let Victoria become a place where this sort of language is fair game against any women at work or any woman in leadership”. What do you think about that?

Pauline Hanson: Suck it up, sweetheart. Right, if you’ve seen what’s happened to me over the years. I remember years ago Tim Fischer called me a witch, and I should be burned at the stake. So I’ve been tagged that long before you. So, anyway, it’s just, toughen up….

Macpherson had no knowledge about Hanson’s allegation about Fischer – so he let it go. Fair enough. However, the comment got reported after the event.

Writing in The Weekend Australian on 13 June, Jack Quail commented:

Senator Hanson first made the accusation in 1998, claiming Mr Fischer and then Howard government foreign minister Alexander Downer had said she should “be put in front of the firing squad and shot or I should be burnt at the stake”. At the time, both men rejected the accusation. In an article published by The Australian on May 22, 1998, a spokesman for Mr Fischer described the claim as “absolute rubbish”, while a spokesman for Mr Downer said the foreign minister “treats her remarks with the respect they deserve, which is absolutely none”.

Now, in 1998, Pauline Hanson, Tim Fischer and Alexander Downer were high profile Australians. It is impossible to accept that either man made such a statement about Hanson which was not reported somewhere in the media. At the time, the first report about the alleged comments occurred when Hanson made the allegation in May 1998, shortly before the June 1998 Queensland election.

Judy Brewer, Tim Fischer’s widow, told The Australian that she has “found no record in the media or anywhere else of these comments being made”. Ms Brewer added: “As he [Fischer] is not here to defend himself, I feel I must either ask for some evidence or an apology from Senator Hanson to ensure the record is true and he is not simply being defamed for political purposes.” Media Watch Dog understands that no evidence has been provided – in response to Judy Brewer’s request.

Media Watch Dog is not suggesting, or implying, that Senator Hanson is lying. Not at all. But, as mentioned earlier, some people have clear “recollections” of events that never happened.

The evidence for Hanson’s claim that Fischer said she was a witch who should be burnt at the stake? Well, no one has produced any report whatsoever that Fischer ever said this. Moreover, Peter Rees, Fischer’s biographer, says that he can find no support for the claim in Fischer’s personal papers or during his research on Fischer.

Questioned by The Conversation’s Michelle Grattan about this during her appearance at the National Press Club on Wednesday 17 June, Senator Hanson stood by her claim. She stated that she had read Tim Fischer’s (alleged) claim “in the paper”. She did not say what paper.

Such leading Nationals figures as John Anderson and Michael McCormack have said that the statement attributed to Fischer is out of character. Gerard Henderson, who was at high school with Fischer and who wrote a short biography of him in A Howard Government?: Inside the Coalition (HarperCollins, 1995), shares this view. Henderson recalls that Fischer did not engage in verbal abuse.

Senator Hanson’s claim could be an example of mistaken identity – that is, someone else may have made the “witch” claim other than Fischer. Or the story could have resulted from a dream or some such. Or maybe she just has a poor memory.

But this episode provides an example of why just because someone makes an accusation it does not mean that it is correct.

MWD will keep readers advised of any developments in this story.

 

 

* * * * *

Until Next Time.

* * * * *