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.
Media Watch -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) on the outfall out of the pipe who's going to put permit conditions another bureaucratic system to be monitored by probably how high to jump by John-Paul. that will be told

By the Premier? No, John-Paul... John and Paul.

They run the place, yeah. Oh, John and Paul. we call them now, John-Paul. John-Paul - John Gaye and Paul Lennon? You're talking about, sorry, That's it, John-Paul for short.

the Pope. We should call them John-Paul II, states odours from the mill stack The SWECO PIC report but Dr Manins is disappointed. won't be a problem, issue in relation to smell - The report doesn't address the main

so-called fugitive emissions. that surrounds every pulp mill, It is the issue and it has to be properly addressed. fugitive emissions of these odours, There has to be assessments of the the approximate areas, and you have to work out and people who would be affected, that's an appropriate price to pay and decide whether for the operation of a pulp mill.

BACKGROUND CHATTER in Kings Park, Launceston, It's ten days ago, is helping the forestry union and Barry Chipman in support of the pulp mill. to organise a rally Hey, boys, all grab a T-shirt. On over the top of you. Grab a T-shirt. feel it's time to take a stand. The Timber Industries for being here on company time. They're paying their workers

Now, wait a minute. we're advertising the true world. Now, The Government's Task Force will be cut down to feed the mill, stated that not one extra tree is here to say but the forestry community depends on the pulp mill going ahead. their future growth

there's a beautiful sign there - Now,

to be the wife of a logger. Oh. I'm proud will use native forest woodchips Initially, the mill as its primary feedstock. your future is threatened? Without the pulp mill,

Yes, most certainly. Our future's not... No, our future isn't threatened. What is threatened, though, to continue to grow and prosper. is the ability industry and its communities People that work in the forest

continue to grow and prosper, want to see our industry is going to deliver that, and the pulp mill and that's what we're looking for. primarily to plantation timber, Gunns say the feedstock will shift as it comes on stream. the Wilderness Society, But the timber workers' old foes, remains suspicious. of the proposed pulp mill The massive appetite

a level of logging in Tasmania will lock in that is completely unsustainable, what is happening at the moment. and will be greater than If that group ever succeed Tasmania's forest industry, in closing down

our colleagues in other industries, they will then turn on and will not be satisfied knitting beanies. until we all sit back in caves

APPLAUSE drive home the same message - Speaker after speaker and the jobs. the economic benefits of the mill It is not just critical

in Northern Tasmania. for the timber industry for the whole Tasmanian economy. It is vital This project is vital

of blue collar industrial workers. for the jobs Thousands of working class families proceeding without further delays. are reliant on this project will apologise to nobody Friends, the CFMEU industrial workers' jobs. for defending Hear, hear!

The crowd is only half that a few weeks before, of the anti-pulp mill rally are here. but the major political parties Liberal Opposition The leader of Tasmania's

CHEERING and Labor Premier Paul Lennon. His message is that Tasmanians can now have it all. Independent reports have told us the best of both worlds. that we can have

and environmental security, We can have economic so it's time. to have a world-class pulp mill. It's time It's time to secure our future, of our forest communities. the future I'm here because it's time. Hear, hear! Gaye will finally get his pulp mill. There's little doubt now that John

it seems that it's already built. In his mind, to build a mill We've actually been able all the environmental guidelines, that will meet and that's all we can expect to do, now to approve it. and it's up to the Parliament

is in four week's time, Parliament's vote are expected to go John Gaye's way. and the numbers or the Federal Court Only the Federal Government for the head of Gunns, could spoil the day

and that appears unlikely. Because of the legal proceedings, John Gaye declined to speak with Four Corners. Our future, our jobs! ALL: Our future, our jobs! But this kind of victory for Gunns for all Tasmanians. will come at a cost in the pulp mill dispute, Whatever side they take it will leave a community bitterly divided

not just over the outcome,

to get to that end. but over the ways and means I'm concerned our government and the company, at the closeness between I'm prepared to say about that. and that's probably all Hey! Our future, our jobs! would be important for all business I would've thought it with government. to have a good relationship anything more than that. Uh, I don't know

Build the bloody pulp mill! Build the bloody pulp mill! Closed Captions by CSI *

This program is not subtitled

prostate didn't hit the ground. Good to know the Prime Minister's terribly painful. I'm told that would have been I'm Monica Attard. Hello, and welcome to the show. The dropping of terrorist-related charges against Dr Mohamed Haneef for a few days. has dominated the headlines by Sydney's 'Daily Telegraph'. And it was clearly welcomed

the home Dr Haneef had left behind, The 'Telegraph' knew a bit about the paper published these photos because while he was in detention, taken by someone who had been inside the Gold Coast apartment.

There's the content of Dr Haneef's fridge, his clothes hanging in his wardrobe, the dirty dish he left behind and the salt shaker on the kitchen table. Even after Mohamed Haneef was freed, the paper was still running those pictures with this caption.

When the 'Telegraph' talks about injustice and apologies, maybe it could look at just how it respected Dr Haneef's privacy. And the truth, when the doctor was winging his way home, the 'Sunday Telegraph' published this headline. There've been thousands of words written about Mohamed Haneef. But it was the 'Australian's Hedley Thomas

and ABC correspondent Rafael Epstein who unravelled the threadbare case against him and brought about his release. And in the 'Australian's case, it was a notable departure from its usual support for the Government's anti-terrorism policies

and the police who enforce them. But while the 'Australian' has led the way in exposing the bungles made by police and prosecutors, it hasn't properly corrected a serious mistake

it made along the way.

That was one of a number of stories that Hedley Thomas extracted from the police interview with Mohamed Haneef - an interview that he was leaked, giving the paper a huge scoop. But that story about police writing in Dr Haneef's diary was wrong. The interview transcript relates how Dr Haneef was shown a note

that police transcribed from his diary. But the interviewing police officer thinks it's a photocopy of Haneef's actual diary entry. Apparently confused, the police officer left the room.

When he returned he said: But reading the transcript, the reporter wrongly assumed the police were showing Dr Haneef the actual diary. So he wrote: But that part of Hedley Thomas's story could only make sense if this key sentence was left out, as it was. That line, missing in Hedley Thomas's story, and this exchange, also missing, would have shown that police hadn't written in Haneef's diary. Hedley Thomas says: But that story wasn't a proper retraction. Hedley Thomas says he was still checking the story

when that was printed, but in the week since, the 'Australian' still hasn't published a correction or retraction.

The 'Australian' isn't the only News Limited paper yet to retract a questionable story about Mohamed Haneef. There's Brisbane's 'Sunday Mail'. Police are investigating whether Mohamed Haneef That story by Paula Doneman and Lincoln Wright also appeared in the 'Sunday Herald Sun', the 'Sunday Telegraph', the 'Sunday Tasmanian', the 'Sunday Times' and Adelaide's 'Sunday Mail'. But was the story true?

So has that denial been reported by the 'Sunday Mail' and all the other News Limited tabloids which ran it? The 'Sunday Mail' didn't, and it blames the AFP for not responding to the claims before it went to print. Though that ignores the AFP's subsequent denial. Queensland Premier Peter Beattie wants an enquiry into how the skyscraper story was leaked. I don't care whether it's State police or federal police,

they need an investigation and they should be telling the world how it got into the newspaper. With those apparently outlandish media allegations still standing, no wonder Dr Haneef might prefer not to be here for now. Now to a land where the rules of journalism simply don't apply. Last week, Laws said his commercial relationship with Qantas wouldn't affect his commentary on claims the airline was risking safety by sending its maintenance crews overseas. But we questioned whether the $100,000-plus deal with the airline resulted in a soft interview on the subject. We copped a right royal serve for that on John Laws's next show. There's always a reason for searching questions in an interview about serious claims. I asked John Laws what his Qantas disclosure was worth once watered down with gushes of affection. Well, I think that indicates the disclosure is very sincere - that I do love the airline.

I fly with Qantas - whenever I possibly can. I've known them for a long time. Geoff Dixon I know very well, John Bugetti I know very well and we have a good relationship - it's more than just a business relationship.

But when you say on air in relation to Qantas - "I love them "and think it's the best airline in the world." but you're entitled to question them if you choose to, do you understand how some people might view that as you stating up front that you are really not interested in critiquing them? Look, I can't understand what everybody's going to think that listens to the program. You know some people might think when I say be kind to each other I really mean go out and kill somebody. I don't know what listeners think. So, which of your comments is correct, Mr Laws, that Qantas's sponsorship doesn't impact your commentary, or, as you commented the day after we broadcast our analysis of your interview, that, "Well, they are sponsors of mine "and what would you expect me to do, "give them a rough ride?" Well, I pursued the truth. It's totally different for you people at the ABC. Who are paid for by the the general public anyway. Why, what difference does that make? Because you don't have an objective view about commercialism. I'm in a commercial industry. I'm paid to do commercials.

That's my job. But you're also acting the part of a journalist. No, no. That's quite incorrect. I'm not acting the part of a journalist. I'm not acting any part. You're conducting interviews. You're seeking information. You're clarifying information. That's the work of a journalist. Well, I'm not a journalist and I don't ever claim to be a journalist.

I don't want to be a journalist. I just want to be a radio broadcaster doing the program the way I have done for 50 years and being as straightforward as I can possibly be and being aware of my commercial demands. Well, what comes first for you? Eliciting information or your commercial arrangements? Depending on the subject - um, if I can get more information through the fact that I have a commercial relationship with somebody so much the better. And do you take into account that the information you get as a result of that commercial arrangement might be somewhat skewed? It would be pointless for Qantas not to be truthful in what they said to me because people like you are going to be hanging around and listening to it all. And you'll blow it up next week anyway so they would be very foolish to be inaccurate, wouldn't they? You don't think that Qantas might use its commercial arrangement with you

in order to hose down a story that's adverse to it? I didn't even see it as being that damaging. It wasn't damaging. Back to the issue of the disparity between the comments you've made. Comment that the Qantas sponsorship doesn't impact your commentary. Doesn't. And then the comment that you made a day later, "They're sponsors of mine, "what would you expect me to do, give them a rough ride?" Well, what would you expect me to do? But isn't that showing essentially that your comment can be bought? No, not at all. It certainly wasn't the intention of the comment. I mean that's silly. I have a commitment to certain people and I adhere to that commitment and do my best to make the commitment worthwhile. Including protecting them if they are under fire? Not including protecting anybody. We take calls about Toyotas that people have had problems with and endeavour to get them remedied by talking to somebody at Toyota. It happens regularly that we do that. But in this case, where there were specific allegations against Qantas, did you not seek to protect them? I sought the truth and got the truth by talking to Qantas. You simply took their word for it? Why wouldn't I? The broadcasting authority, ACMA, might think it's got John Laws under control by forcing him to disclose his commercial arrangements. But it hasn't. John Laws lives in a world where Laws's rules apply and taking care of business runs journalism into second place. In his world, there's always a way to please those sponsors. That's it from us tonight.

See you next week.

CC

Good evening. Mohamed Haneef may be

back home in India, but the row

back home in India, but the row about his treatment continues in Australia.

The Immigration Minister, Kevin

Andrews, is refusing to apologise

Andrews, is refusing to apologise for cancelling the doctor's visa and the

Prime Minister is backing Mr Andrews.

Dr Haneef was welcomed back to

Bangalore by a large crowd. He told

Bangalore by a large crowd. He told a press conference he'd been

press conference he'd been victimised by the Australian Government. And a

former medical colleague of Dr

Haneef's has been suspended from

work. Queensland Health says the

decision to suspend Dr Mohamed Ali

was made on information received

was made on information received from the Australian Federal Police, But

the Australian Federal Police, But in no way relates to terrorism. And the

Swedish film director Ingmar Bergman

has died. Bergman won the Best

Foreign Film Oscar in 1982 for

Foreign Film Oscar in 1982 for 'Fanny and Alexander. He first gained

international attention in 1995 with

'Smiles of a Summer Night'. The

'Smiles of a Summer Night'. The actor Woody Allen once described Bergman

Woody Allen once described Bergman as the greatest film artist. He was 89.

Tomorrow's weather in the capitals.

Brisbane and Darwin - Mostly sunny.

Sydney and Canberra - morning fog.

Sydney and Canberra - morning fog. In Melbourne it'll be windy. Hobart

should be fine. And Adelaide and

Perth are expecting a shower or two.

For more news, join 'Lateline' at 10: For more news, join 'Lateline' at 10:35pm.