Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
7.30 Report -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

(generated from captions) This program is captioned live.

Tonight - soccer great Pe bs le

calls it football church. Current

star Beckham calls it the ultimate

stadium. For Australia's Multiplex,

it's a financial disaster. There's

definitely going to be a: look at

us, we're in the UK marketplace now

and we're building Wembley for you.

There is always the issue of

cross-cultural differences in the

way business is conducted. And -

blowing away the car park smoke and

shadows. Some of the agents who

worked the case thought he was Deep

Throat at the time. America's

best-known whistle blower finally

gets a face. We really appreciate

you comin' out like this. Your

This program is captioned live. are in danger. you comin' out like this. Your lives

phone calls and even direct threats, Having endured months of abusive Welcome to the program.

and Australian authorities the fears of Indonesian have today been realised. attack of its kind in Australia, In what could be the first was today sealed off the Indonesian Embassy containing a biological agent. after receiving a letter have been quarantined as a result. Up to 50 staff at the embassy what the package contained, It's still not clear exactly attack is a reckless criminal act but the Prime Minister says the relationship with Indonesia. that could damage our responsibility for the attack, As yet, no-one has claimed and, at times, hysterical coverage but after months of prominent of the Corby case,

the motivation seems clear enough. Michael Brissenden reports. From Canberra, political editor

Has populist passion and public

anger led inevitably to this? It

looks like a training exercise, but

this is real. Quite possibly the

first biological attack in

Australian history. Outside the

Indonesian Embassy, the

were standing by, the body suits Indonesian Embassy, the fire-engines

were deployed, and inside, up to 50

staff were quarantined. Whatever

biological agent was that was sent staff were quarantined. Whatever the

to the Indonesian Embassy, there

be little doubt what motivated the to the Indonesian Embassy, there can

attack. Do you believe that this is

a result of the Corby conviction in

Indonesia? Well, it would be a

remarkable coincidence if it were

not. I mean I can't prove that, but

if it is, can I say to those

responsible: you will not achieve

your objective. Quite apart from

murderous criminality of doing your objective. Quite apart from the

something like this, and the

indifference and contempt for human

life that it displays, it won't

achieve the objective. It will have

the opposite effect. The fate of

Schapelle Corby has gripped the

nation for months and the hysteria

surrounding her case reached its

zenith in the last few days. This

has been a trial played out in the

full media glare in Bali and here

Australia. The passions stirred by full media glare in Bali and here in

what many clearly believe is an

injustice have also spurred a race

for ratings and circulation,

program, blanket television for ratings and circulation, special

coverage, screaming front-page

headlines and talkback hysteria.

The judges she addressed yesterday

don't speak English. And won't get

translation of her comments until don't speak English. And won't get a

today. What's that say about

justice, Balinese style? I thought

she did brilliantly, Schapelle

Corby, in very difficult

circumstances, and in the fair

dinkum stakes, this ought to mean

game, set and match. Many Indonesia

analysts have watched the frenzied

media coverage of the past few

is dismay. On the wund hand there media coverage of the past few weeks

have been some attempts to have

careful and dispassionate analysis

of the case and the wider

implications of it and on the other

there's been hysterical headlines

that blow things out of all

proportion, and ultimately don't

help Schapelle Corby, and don't

the relationship between our two help Schapelle Corby, and don't help

countries. This ugly and at times

xenophobic response to Indonesian

justice has put the government in

extremely difficult position. Well justice has put the government in an

Foreign Minister aware of popular opinion, the

Foreign Minister has, over the past

few days appealed repeatedly for a Foreign Minister has, over the past

calm and rational response to the

verdict in the Bali court. This

afternoon things moved to an

altogether more serious plane oo. I

I can advise the House now that pan

envelope has been taken to a

laboratory at the Canberra hospital

for further analysis at 12.25 today.

The initial analysis of the powder

has tested positive as a biological

agent. Though further testing will

need to be carried out to determine

what that substance actually is

This sort of outrageous behaviour

must not be encouraged. An

atmosphere which encourages it

not be sustained This is a very atmosphere which encourages it must

serious development for our country

and I can't overstate the sense of

concern I feel that such a

recklessly criminal act should have

been committed. The

Indonesia-Australia relationship

been one of a diplomatic success Indonesia-Australia relationship has

stories of the past few years. Just

a few months ago during his visit

Australia the Indonesian President a few months ago during his visit to

was moved enough to express

sentiments that would have been all

but impossible a few years ago.

We can take this friendship very far. For me now,

far. For me now. At the time many

Indonesian analysts like Professor

Andrew Macintyre thought this was

the most significant breakthrough

ever in our diplomatic relationship

with Indonesia. Today, he says

strong government to government with Indonesia. Today, he says those

should hold, but the real concern strong government to government ties

what impact this will have among should hold, but the real concern is

ordinary Indonesians. The fear has

to be that many Indonesians will

conclude from this incident that

their latent fears that Australia's

not the warm and friendly country

that it presents itself as is in

fact true. And this is something

government in Jakarta is well aware

government in Jakarta is well aware fact true. And this is something the

of as well. Anti-Australian

sentiment in Indonesia has

played out strongly in the past, sentiment in Indonesia has certainly

the Australian embassy in Jakarta played out strongly in the past, and

has borne the brunt of that in the

form of protests and even direct

attack. This afternoon, the Foreign

Ministry seemed keenly aware of the

emotional response that might be

stirred up as a result of today's

events. It's our responsibility as

government to put the lead in terms events. It's our responsibility as a

of not allowing things to get out

hand. We will be keen to send out of not allowing things to get out of

the message among the Indonesian

public that this is probably the

of, you know, someone that's not public that this is probably the act

rational in terms of mind-set, and of, you know, someone that's not too

that it should not be portrayed as

being an act of hostilities on the

part of Australians in general. So

we would want to make sure that we

do not have - we can contain this

and not let things get out of hand.

The Indonesians also have little

doubt what has sparked the attack.

doubt what has sparked the attack. The thing is, whether we like it or

not, as part and parcel of the

attention that the court case has

been obtaining in Australia, we've

been receiving certain threats

against our embassies, diplomatic

missions in Australia. The question

now is: what will the diplomatic

consequences of what appears to be

consequences of what appears to be a singular irrational act? Of course

it's damaging, and that's why I'm

it's damaging, and that's why I'm so alarmed about it and so concerned

about it. It's not helpful. If it's

related in any way to the Corby

case, can I say to the perpetrators:

you have not achieved your

objective. In fact, you have made

objective. In fact, you have made it harder for the poor girl. Here and

in Jakarta, everyone is well aware

how delicate this is. But the hope

is, the hard won diplomatic detente

that's developed over the past few

years is resilient enough to

withstand the peculiar pressures of

a trial played out in the media and

the consequences that now appears the consequences that now appears to have delivered. Political editor Michael Brissenden. Ever since London's Wembley Stadium opened in 1923, much blood has been spilled on the hallowed turf of this great sporting arena. Now it's Australian blood - only this time, it's off the field.

When the Australian construction company Multiplex

landed the contract in 2000 to redevelop Wembley, it saw it as a golden opportunity to make a splash on the world stage. Instead, Wembley has turned into a financial disaster, with Multiplex expecting to lose $109 million from the project. Executive Chairman John Roberts, who founded the company back in 1962, resigned last week, and now there are grave fears that Multiplex won't meet next year's deadline - English soccer's grand showpiece, the FA Cup final. Finance editor Emma Alberici reports.

They've made it one of the most

recognisable sights in the world,

the 1948 Olympic Games... the 1966

World Cup final... and the 1985

Live Aid concert. SONG: # Don't

Live Aid concert. SONG: # Don't let the sun go down on me # So when it

came to rebuilding Wembley

came to rebuilding Wembley Stadium, the contract

the contractor wasn't dealing with

an ordinary sports ground but a

global icon. It was the

headline-grabbing project, the $1.2

billion contract to rebuild wem bee,

that Australia's Multiplex hoped

would make it an international

player. When they came to UK, they

were virtually unknown, but it was

definitely going to be a look at us,

we're in the UK marketplace now,

we're in the UK marketplace now, and we're building Wembley for you.

From its humble beginnings in

From its humble beginnings in Perth in 1962, the company became one of

Australia's biggest builder,

achieving international acclaim and

exposure with the construction of

the Sydney Olympic stadium. After

that milestone, it was keen to

explore its more global aspirations,

and jumped at the opportunity to

move into the UK. But the Wembley

project is behind schedule and over

budget, which doesn't surprise

observers in the UK, who largely

believe the contract price was

believe the contract price was never viable. Construction bosses working

in the UK will be having a slight

chuckle about what's going on at

chuckle about what's going on at the moment. I think most of the UK

industry thought that they were

going to be on a hiding to nothing,

in terms of actually making money

in terms of actually making money on the job, and it looks, from the

various announcements over the last

couple of days from Multiplex, that

they look like being proved correct.

There is always the issue of

cross-cultural differences in the

way business is conducted, and

whilst Multiplex has been

exceptionally successful over a

40-year period here in Australia,

moving into a new market requires

potentially different mind set.

In February, management at

Multiplex revealed that Wembley

would not make the company a

profit. A month later, they said

that the project would actually

make a loss of $50 million. And in

a virtually unprecedented move for

corporate Australia, the Roberts

family, who founded Multiplex 43

years ago, offered to personally

compensate the company for those

losses. It's been a reasonably

unusual step for someone to stand

behind their activities, to such an

extent, $50 million is a lost money

in anyone's language. And you know,

I guess it's a shame for them that

unfortunately it hasn't achieved

unfortunately it hasn't achieved the desired result. In the past week,

chairman and founder John Roberts

resigned ahead of an announcement

resigned ahead of an announcement to investors that the losses on the 90,

investors that the losses on the 90,000 seat stadium were actually

more than double what they'd

originally thought. Fund manager

Stuart Stuckey says the cost

blow-out might not end there. The

109 million loss as the company

itself says it still contingent on

itself says it still contingent on a snm of factors, including stable

steel prices, no issues with

steel prices, no issues with respect to labour, even down to weather.

So there are still a number of

So there are still a number of risks associated with the project. The

cost troubles at Wembley coincided

with an extortion threat back in

March. Multiplex was warned that

March. Multiplex was warned that its workers would be shot unless they

handed over $50 million. There's

also been a legal dispute between

Multiplex and one of its

subcontractors at the Wembley site.

Cleveland Bridge, the company

employed to construct the massive

steel arch over the stadium, sued

Multiplex for what it claimed was a

breach of contract. Multiplex has

counter-sued. Russell Lynch has

counter-sued. Russell Lynch has been following the dispute closely for

'Construction News', the UK's

leading trade magazine. We can't

obviously predict the outcome of

obviously predict the outcome of the court case but one thing we can say

is that in three separate

adjudications against Multiplex,

which took place late last year,

Cleveland Bridge has already been award

awarded $12 million Australian as a

result of those adjudications.

If they lose the case, they could

be up for at least another $60

million in costs. Already,

Multiplex management says the

delays will push the completion

date out to March, three months

later than initially promised,

putting it dangerously close to

putting it dangerously close to the FA Cup final scheduled for early

May. I think it's a PR disaster for

them, and if they don't actually

them, and if they don't actually get Wembley finished on time, then that

will take a severe - their

credibility in this country will

take a severe knock. After 41 years

as a fiercely private company, in

December 2003, the family business

founded in Perth by pat yark John

Roberts offered shares to the

public. If you look back at the

opportunity to invest today in 5 or

in 10 years' time, I think it will

be seen as really quite a

be seen as really quite a remarkable opportunity. Multiplex raised $1.2

billion with the Roberts family

eventually reducing their stake to

just 26%. The transition from

private to public company has been

less than smooth. When you're a

private company, you can

private company, you can communicate within your own four walls, and I

guess the process is a lot easier

because everyone is within those

four walls. But when you have

external capital, public

shareholders, there is that

shareholders, there is that constant requirement to stand up, present,

deliver full details. Over the past

five months, as details of the

Wembley disaster have emerged,

shareholders have seen the value of

their investment in Multiplex more

than hall of. No-one from the

Roberts family would be interviewed

for our story. They clearly don't

like being questioned, which is a

problem when you're supposed to be

problem when you're supposed to be a public company with

public company with responsibilities to the many thousands of people

whose money you're playing with.

whose money you're playing with. The Australian Securities and

Investments Commission is

investigating just how prompt

Multiplex has been with its public

disclosures, considering it sold

more shares in December last year,

only to reveal two months later it

was having problems at Wembley

Clearly the marketplace has lost

confidence, the allure of the

confidence, the allure of the growth profile that was originally

projected into the UK has clearly

lost that shine, and the Multiplex

group, I am certain, will be

required to give further guidance

before any investor or shareholder

will support the terms. Emma Alberici with that report. The Pan Pharmaceutical scandal two years ago

exposed weakness in the regulation of herbal and natural remedies. The massive recall of Pan products prompted the Federal Government to commission a review of the burgeoning alternative therapies industry. That review found that the sometimes dangerous side effects of complementary medicines were being widely under-reported and the Federal Government has since agreed to overhaul its reporting system

and to develop a public information campaign. Many health professionals believe these are improvements that can't come soon enough, as Peter McCutcheon reports.

Brisbane optometrist Julie Newport recently had a serious health scare. Her menstrual period just wouldn't stop. I'm 37, and you think, "Oh, well, it's not unknown "for people to come down with horrible things "and die in front of their children", sort of thing. So I - I was a little concerned.

The problem had Julie Newport and her GP stumped until, almost as an afterthought, she mentioned she'd been taking large doses of fish oil for dry eyes. It was the very last thing that I came up with, and she said, "Well, yes, that's probably the most likely answer." This is the sort of adverse reaction to complementary medicines that many health professionals believe is being widely underreported. We need people to start talking, to realise that these things are not just straight safe; there can be side effects. We believe that the products are inherently relatively safe but we obviously have to have mechanisms in place to pick up the occasional interaction and bad reaction. Australians are consuming more complementary medicines than ever before.

Although the vast majority of these herbal and natural mixtures are safe, their growing popularity

also increases the chances of the occasional complication. I'm not saying that we're all dropping dead like flies but there are safety issues. Was there anything wrong with her immune system? Geraldine Moses runs Australia's only telephone hotline for consumers who are worried about the side effects of their medication. Based at the Mater Hospital in Brisbane,

she's been concerned at the growing number of calls about complementary medicines. About 6% of calls to this consumer hotline are about herbal or natural medicines -

more than double the rate of reports to the Therapeutic Goods Administration by industry and health professionals. There's an enormous range. The spectrum ranges from minor things like skin rashes, taste disturbances, funny-looking fingernails to very serious reactions that could include painful neuropathies, which means damage to nerves. We don't have enough information to offer exact figures on the risks, and that's our problem. Brisbane gastroenterologist Dr Peter Whiting has seen some of the most extreme cases of what he believes are adverse reactions to herbal remedies. Dr Whiting co-authored a scientific paper describing how six patients developed severe hepatitis after taking a range of herbal medicines, including black cohosh. But we are seeing the tip of the iceberg, obviously. These are people who are referred to a tertiary liver centre where there's liver transplantation available. We have no idea about the subacute or those patients who feel unwell with mild abnormalities in their liver tests who don't make it to see us. The Federal Government commissioned a review of the complementary medicines industry two years ago after the recall of suspect products manufactured by Pan Pharmaceuticals. Some of the review's key recommendations included increased research, a public education campaign about the potential for adverse reactions to complementary medicines and improved reporting systems. We do need a much better system of reporting. I agree totally with that recommendation. It needs to be vastly improved. Tony Lewis from the peak industry group the Complementary Health Care Council agrees there may well be underreporting of adverse reactions but says consumers should not be alarmed. They are very, very low-risk products. If you compare them say to pharmaceutical products, extremely low risk. If you compare them to food, for example, and look at the cases involving bad reactions to food, you find that the rate of reaction for complementary medicines is a lot lower than for a lot of foodstuffs. But the greatest area of concern according to the Federal Government's review was the interaction between complementary and orthodox medicines. The risks increase considerably when patients don't tell their doctors about their complementary medication. Often people won't tell us that they are on herbal medicines. Anywhere up to 30 or 40% of people who are on herbs or other complementary medicines will not tell a medical practitioner because they perceive there is a conflict between the medical practitioner and those practising alternative medicines. The Federal Government is now working on a new strategy to improve the quality and quantity of reporting adverse reactions to complementary medicines. The man who headed the government's review of the industry, Dr Michael Bollen, says such a strategy should target practitioners as well as the general public. 42% of the population are taking complementary medicines in addition to other medication, and it's the potential there for interaction that's of as great a concern. But as Julie Newport's case illustrates, it's all too easy to forget to tell GPs and specialists about complementary medication. As a health professional herself, she knew about the effects of fish oil, but almost neglected to tell her doctor. I did know. It was just one of those stupid things

that you don't think these things could apply to you, and sure enough, it did. That report from Peter McCutcheon. There's been no more famous source in journalism, but until today we could only guess at who 'Deep Throat' really was. He was the highly placed man somewhere inside the Nixon administration who helped two young 'Washington Post' journalists, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, deliver the coup de grace in the Watergate scandal that brought down the deeply compromised presidency of Richard Nixon.

Therefore, I shall resign the

presidency, effective at noon tomorrow. It took nearly two years

for the full horror and madness of the White House-sponsored break-in

at Democratic Party headquarters in Washington's Watergate Hotel to be revealed. For 30 years the identity of Deep Throat, Bob Woodward's crucial Watergate source, was Washington's favourite guessing game -

until today, when 90-year-old Mark Felt, then Deputy FBI Chief, outed himself. It was the stuff of journalistic legend - of cloak and dagger, of clandestine car park meetings.

Now that we know who he was, the definitive Watergate film 'All the President's Men', comes even more dramatically to life.

Where are you? Stuck. The story has

stalled on us. And you thought I'd

help? I'll never quote you. Another former 'Washington Post' journalist, Ron Kessler, named Mark Felt as Deep Throat in his book on the FBI, 'The Bureau', three years ago, but Felt denied it at the time. I spoke with Ron Kessler at his Maryland home earlier today. Ron Kessler, given that you were the first person

to strongly identify Mark Felt as Deep Throat, what were the key indicators for you? Well, first of all, of course, he was in a perfect position to provide this information to Woodward. He was No. 2 in the Bureau at the time. He was in charge of the Watergate investigation.

But beyond that,

you could speculate about all kinds of people who had some information, but the more important thing to me was that when I went out to interview Mark Felt -

and he had not been interviewed in decades - for my book 'The Bureau', his diary told me that, well, lo and behold, Bob Woodward had been out there just about a year and a half ago and that Woodward had shown up unannounced, came in a limousine,

had the limousine park about two blocks away, and they went out to lunch and had martinis, which is sort of unusual for Woodward. Now, I just thought: there is no reason in the world why Woodward, who has lots to do and was not working on some FBI book,

would go out to California and see Mark Felt, and especially would not have all this secrecy surrounding it where he has the limousine parked two blocks away unless, in fact, he still had a secret relationship with Mark Felt, and that's the basis that I had for concluding that Mark Felt was Deep Throat. So how would you describe Mark Felt in the Watergate days? Well, Mark Felt was No. 2. He was certainly very ambitious.

He was also very offended at the person Nixon had put in charge of the Bureau on top of him, whose name was L. Patrick Gray, who actually became involved in some of the Watergate improprieties. So certainly Mark Felt had a motive here. He certainly would've liked Nixon to leave the White House and perhaps appoint him as FBI Director. But I do think beyond that that Mark Felt was concerned that the FBI's investigation of Watergate and Nixon would be suppressed by Nixon. Certainly Nixon was trying to do that. He was making up all these stories about CIA secrets that had to be protected and therefore there shouldn't be an FBI investigation. So the FBI agents working the case - and I interviewed them as well - were worried that there would be some kind of effort to have a cover-up, and by giving this information to Woodward, helping him with his stories - and Woodward already had other sources as well - Mark Felt was pretty much guaranteeing that this investigation would not be suppressed, and I think, you know, really guaranteeing the future of the country, because Nixon was such a criminal that he would have torn up, the constitution, I think, to protect his own position.

So Mark Felt really was in the box seat to know what was going on in the Watergate investigation? Mark Felt was actually in charge of the Watergate investigation, so every day, he would see the 302s, as they were called, the reports of interviews turned in by FBI agents. He was the most up-to-date person on the investigation, had the most complete and accurate information on the investigation. So it's just remarkable that he was the source. It's equally remarkable, if you think about it, that he wasn't uncovered as Deep Throat at the time, because you can just imagine the kind of witch-hunt that would have emanated from the White House, and if he was running the investigation, he would've been a prime suspect. Yeah, but you know, if you look at

all the leaks that have come out over the years, hardly any leaker has ever been caught, and Mark Felt, being an FBI agent, was especially good at making sure he wasn't caught. He had actually spent most of his career in the FBI in counter-intelligence, catching spies, and the methods that he gave Woodward to communicate with him, namely, moving a 'New York Times', moving a flowerpot, those are classic spy techniques for communicating - KGB uses them, FBI counter-intelligence, CIA uses them. So that again, in my mind, pinpointed Mark Felt as the person who was Deep Throat. How would you describe the ethos of the FBI at the time? Well, at that point, J. Edgar Hoover had just died. J. Edgar Hoover created the FBI, did a lot of very good things, created the laboratory, created a very good filing system but, at the same time, he engaged in all kinds of abuses, illegal conduct, including illegal wire tapping. But this was a time of transition when Hoover had died - they were still afraid he might come back - but at that point, you know, there was good and bad, and I think Mark Felt was an honourable agent, a very capable agent, and I think, in the end, he really had the interests of the country at heart. How do you think the FBI today will react to the revelations that it was one of their own - in fact, one of their most senior people -

who blew the whistle on the President? I don't think they're gonna be very surprised. Some of the agents who worked the case, you know, thought he was Deep Throat at the time. I think that the Director, Robert Mueller, would understand that perhaps a larger purpose was served by this, so I don't think there's going to be much consternation there at the bureau. Do you agree with his daughter, who said to him when she was trying to persuade him to go public that he's a hero? I think most people do think of Mark Felt as a hero, based on what I've heard so far,

because the bottom line is, this country was at a very perilous point in our history at that stage, and it really could have gone either way, and it came out OK,

and it's because, in part, of Mark Felt's efforts. Can you think of a more famous source in journalistic history

than Deep Throat? No, nothing comes close to this source. Ron Kessler, thanks very much for talking with us. My pleasure. Thank you. That's the program for tonight. We'll be back at the same time tomorrow, but for now, goodnight. Captions by Captioning and Subtitling International.