Speaker 1: The Commission of war crimes in Afghanistan we know about
Speaker 1: and have been out of call for action because people
Speaker 1: spoke up.
Speaker 2: Tonight, a member of the SAS is in custody, refused
Speaker 2: bail and charged with war crimes over the death of
Speaker 2: a civilian in Afghanistan.
Speaker 1: I often think of the Banking Royal Commission. Every Australian
Speaker 1: with a bank account or credit card is better off
Speaker 1: because people like Jeff Morris doctor ben Coe spoke up.
Speaker 3: Hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for those service companies,
Speaker 3: misleading and obstructing regulators, the charging of dead people, the
Speaker 3: sale knowingly of worthless insurance policies.
Speaker 4: Some of the biggest scandals in Australian history robodebt, dodgy
Speaker 4: ato debt collectors and alleged war crimes, could have stayed
Speaker 4: hidden forever.
Speaker 1: So many of the injustices we know about and have
Speaker 1: been able to call for action and justice on have
Speaker 1: only come to light because courageous Australians spoke up.
Speaker 4: But the lives of those Australians are too often left
Speaker 4: in ruins because of weak whistleblower protection laws. The result
Speaker 4: is others decide the cost isn't worth it, and we
Speaker 4: all lose.
Speaker 1: When people stay silent about wrongdoing, injustice is allowed to
Speaker 1: continue and it's impossible to call for accountability and change.
Speaker 4: I'm Nicole Johnston and you're listening to seven Am Today
Speaker 4: journalist and lawyer Karen Pender on what's wrong with our
Speaker 4: whistleblower laws and why we should protect those who bravely
Speaker 4: speak up. It's Friday, February twenty seven. Whistleblowers often face
Speaker 4: an inherent risk when they're choosing to speak out, especially
Speaker 4: in high profile national cases. So could you tell us
Speaker 4: about the people who've ultimately paid the price for coming forward.
Speaker 1: We've seen in recent years a number of high profile
Speaker 1: prosecutions people like Richard Boyle or Bernard Callery Witness K,
Speaker 1: all of whom were dragged through the court system for
Speaker 1: their role in speaking up about wrongdoing.
Speaker 2: A secret hearing has begun in the spy case against
Speaker 2: Camber lawyer Bernard Caleary, who's been charged with conspiring with
Speaker 2: former senior intelligence officer Witness K to reveal details of
Speaker 2: an Australian spying operation in East teamwork.
Speaker 5: I'm charged with conspiring with Witness K, my client, whom
Speaker 5: I interviewed in the same way I have for forty
Speaker 5: nearly fifty years, So it means I've conspired with every
Speaker 5: client I've ever had.
Speaker 1: Right now, there's a whistleblower, David McBride, who remains in prison.
Speaker 6: You've been in.
Speaker 7: Jail now for nearly six months.
Speaker 1: How's it been It's been hard. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: say it hasn't been hard. I think the important point though,
Speaker 1: is that they are the tip of the iceberg. They are,
Speaker 1: of course the most visible examples of injustices faced by whistleblowers,
Speaker 1: but there are many other people who when they speak
Speaker 1: up at work about wrongdoing, suffer retaliation, whether that's sort
Speaker 1: of just being mistreated at work, or losing their job,
Speaker 1: or finding it impossible to get work elsewhere in their industry,
Speaker 1: to facing legal threats, facing lawsuits and then in the
Speaker 1: ultimate case, facing prosecution.
Speaker 4: So you helped launch Australia's first dedicated whistleblower legal service
Speaker 4: in twenty twenty three. What was that moment where you
Speaker 4: thought we have to do this.
Speaker 1: Australia was once a world leader in laws to protect whistleblowers,
Speaker 1: but really fell behind the rest of the world in
Speaker 1: failing to turn those paper rights into practical protections, and
Speaker 1: we think a big cause for that was the absence
Speaker 1: of specialist legal support. If whistle of bows can't get
Speaker 1: access to specialized pro bono legal support, those rights don't
Speaker 1: really work. Already, since we launched, we've been contacted by
Speaker 1: over six hundred whistleblowers, We've advised over two hundred people
Speaker 1: seeking our help, and we've represented over fifty clients on
Speaker 1: an ongoing basis. But I think the message we're seeing
Speaker 1: from our client base is that anyone could become a whistleblower.
Speaker 1: Any person could go to work tomorrow and see something
Speaker 1: wrong and speak up and hopefully that would all go well.
Speaker 1: But unfortunately, the experience we know from the research and
Speaker 1: from our own client experience is that too many people
Speaker 1: suffer when they speak up. And that's why it's so
Speaker 1: important that people can access the support and dedicated legal
Speaker 1: expertise they need.
Speaker 4: You said, you've had six hundred people come to you,
Speaker 4: but you're only working on about fifty cases. Is that
Speaker 4: because some people go through the process of wanting to
Speaker 4: expose something, but in the end they decide that the
Speaker 4: personal cost is too great.
Speaker 1: Certainly that does happen now we are a small, predominantly
Speaker 1: filanthropically funded charity. We can't help everyone. We don't have
Speaker 1: the resources to help everyone, and so there's a still
Speaker 1: notwithstanding our best efforts and access to justice have but
Speaker 1: it's certainly the case that people say to us they
Speaker 1: are scared of speaking up. The high profile prosecutions and
Speaker 1: lawsuits against whistleblowers have had a chilling effect. Better laws,
Speaker 1: better culture, better support should mean that Australians can speak
Speaker 1: up about wrongdoing and know they'll be heard and know
Speaker 1: that action will be taken.
Speaker 4: Now, there are laws that are meant to protect whistleblowers
Speaker 4: from being punished for exposing misconduct at work. So why
Speaker 4: is it that you think they're failing and what needs
Speaker 4: to change.
Speaker 1: It's not just us that think those laws are not working.
Speaker 1: The government has accepted that federal public sector whistle blowing
Speaker 1: laws aren't working.
Speaker 7: The Albanezi government is committed to restoring trust and integrity
Speaker 7: to government and an effective public sector whistle blowing framework
Speaker 7: is essential to achieving this.
Speaker 1: Including there's currently a review into federal private sector whistleblowing
Speaker 1: laws as well at a state and territory level. We've
Speaker 1: got a real patchwork and at a federal level. As
Speaker 1: I mentioned, we've not only got the main two laws
Speaker 1: for public servants and for the private sector, we've also
Speaker 1: got nine different federal whistle blowing laws. Some people are
Speaker 1: covered by none, some people are covered by several of those,
Speaker 1: and all of them are different and all of them
Speaker 1: are inconsistent. So it's a bit of a legal mind field.
Speaker 1: But we know that those laws need to change. The
Speaker 1: government has admitted as much. We've been calling for some
Speaker 1: time now for the establishment of a federal whistle blower
Speaker 1: Protection Authority to try and fill that gap, to try
Speaker 1: and give people the support they need to oversee and
Speaker 1: enforce these laws. But we haven't seen the robust and
Speaker 1: courageous law reform that we.
Speaker 4: Need coming up scandals and cover ups Australia should know
Speaker 4: about but doesn't.
Speaker 6: Today the Attorney General has announced consultation on stage two
Speaker 6: of public sector whistleblower reforms. That will be important going forward.
Speaker 6: As I indicated that would come forward here.
Speaker 4: In the Albanzi government, it's been talking about improving whistleblower
Speaker 4: protections since it took office in twenty twenty two. They
Speaker 4: campaigned on it and promised immediate action. So what have
Speaker 4: they done.
Speaker 1: There have been some small changes to some federal whistlebloing
Speaker 1: laws since the Albanzi government took office. Right now there
Speaker 1: is an exposure draft for much more substantial, wide ranging
Speaker 1: reform to our federal public sector whistleblowing laws that was
Speaker 1: released in September of last year. We are waiting for
Speaker 1: the government to act. The government talks a good game
Speaker 1: on protecting whistleblowers. Unfortunately, under the government's watch we've seen
Speaker 1: these high profile prosecutions continue. They were started under the
Speaker 1: last government, they've continued under this government.
Speaker 7: The Member for Clark has concerns about the prosecution of
Speaker 7: mister David McBride and mister Richard Boyle. As I told
Speaker 7: the House yesterday in response to a question from the
Speaker 7: Member for Clark, I am strongly of the view that
Speaker 7: integrity and the rule of law are central to Australia's
Speaker 7: criminal justice arrangements.
Speaker 1: Don't get me wrong. Some changes that have already introduced
Speaker 1: have been important, and some of the proposed changes would
Speaker 1: go some way towards better protecting whistleblowers. The government has proposed,
Speaker 1: for example, under the federal Public Sector Law, to establish
Speaker 1: a whistle blowing Ombardsman within the Commonwealth obitdsman that would
Speaker 1: go some way towards addressing some of the gaps. But
Speaker 1: it is not an independent whistleblower protection authority that we
Speaker 1: think Australia needs and would follow in the footsteps of
Speaker 1: a number of other countries. We've got whistleblowing ombardsmen and
Speaker 1: whistle blowing authorities around the world in different places. We
Speaker 1: need ambition from this government. There's law forming train. It's
Speaker 1: not happening fast enough and it's not ambitious enough.
Speaker 4: Is there an argument though, that while some whistleblowers should
Speaker 4: be protected, that there is some information that's sensitive, classified
Speaker 4: government or intelligence information that should be kept secret to
Speaker 4: protect Australia's national interest.
Speaker 1: Of Course, no one is calling for cut blanche transparency,
Speaker 1: transparency or costs. Of Course, some national security information should
Speaker 1: be kept secret, and there's a necessary reason for that secrecy.
Speaker 1: The problem is not getting the balance right. The problem
Speaker 1: is Australia has swung so far towards secrecy that it's
Speaker 1: undermining our democracy. Australia at a federal level has almost
Speaker 1: a thousand secrecy offenses on the books. Again, the government
Speaker 1: has accepted that's too many. The Government's accepted. There's major
Speaker 1: problems with that, And in relation to national security whistle blowing,
Speaker 1: there are some complex issues there and where you draw
Speaker 1: the line, reasonable minds may differ, but at the moment
Speaker 1: those lines are drawn in such a way that it's
Speaker 1: impossible for national security whistleblowers to speak up.
Speaker 4: Kieran, do you have any sense of how many scandals
Speaker 4: or cover ups or injustices you think going on in
Speaker 4: this country right now hidden away because people who may
Speaker 4: want to blow the whistle have seen what's happened to
Speaker 4: people like David McBride, who as we know, is currently
Speaker 4: serving five years in jail, and they're too scared to
Speaker 4: come forward.
Speaker 1: Yes, there are many things that would shock your listeners
Speaker 1: that are currently not coming into the public domain. I
Speaker 1: have clients who make the decision not to speak up
Speaker 1: because of the risks they know they face, and it
Speaker 1: is very difficult for people to raise concerns about wrongdoing,
Speaker 1: you know, I think it's important to say that it's
Speaker 1: not as if most whistleblowers want to go and be
Speaker 1: on the front page of the newspaper straight away. Most people,
Speaker 1: in most circumstances to what the law says is the
Speaker 1: right thing they speak up in internally, nothing happens. They
Speaker 1: speak up to a regulator, nothing happens. Typically, the public whistleblime,
Speaker 1: which is obviously the most prominent, is the last resort.
Speaker 1: We've had lots of success helping people resolve concerns internally,
Speaker 1: resolve concerns with regulators, with antiruption bodies and so on.
Speaker 1: But is certainly the case that there's too much secrecy
Speaker 1: in Australia. There's not enough transparency. It's too hard to
Speaker 1: be a whistleblower in Australia right now. We are doing
Speaker 1: all we can to try and make it less hard.
Speaker 1: We need the government to do more.
Speaker 4: Kieran, thanks so much for speaking with us.
Speaker 1: I appreciate it.
Speaker 4: Also in the news, the Treasurer has flagged that the
Speaker 4: upcoming federal budget will include belt tightening amid higher than
Speaker 4: expected inflation. The Reserve Bank is expected to hold rate
Speaker 4: after lifting them to three point eighty five percent in February,
Speaker 4: although the latest inflation figures have increased the risk of
Speaker 4: another rise. Jim Chalmers says that inflationary pressure is driving
Speaker 4: the need for additional budget savings, and Trade Minister Don
Speaker 4: Farrell says the United States will keep at ten percent
Speaker 4: tariff on Australian goods. The US Supreme Court has ruled
Speaker 4: parts of the legal mechanism used to impose tariffs were unlawful,
Speaker 4: prompting speculation the administration would reset rates and lift the
Speaker 4: global baseline to fifteen percent. Farrell says US officials have
Speaker 4: now confirmed Australia won't face an increase, but the ten
Speaker 4: percent tariff on Australian exports will remain in place while
Speaker 4: the US administration responds to the ruling. I'm Nicole Johnston.
Speaker 4: This is seven am. Thanks for listening.