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 or accept liability for the accuracy or usefulness of the transcripts.These are copied directly from the broadcaster's website.
Lateline -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

Tonight, falling Sky - Rupert Murdoch forced to pull out of his massive bid for the UK broadcaster
BSkyB.

This is a victory for people up and down this country who have appalled by the revelations about
phone hacking, who have thought it's beyond belief that Mr Murdoch could, when this criminal
investigation criminal investigation is going on,es panned he is stake in the British media.

Now the outrage has spread to Australia.

There's a sufficient concern about the potential unrolling of similar events in this country to
warrant a look at who owns the media, why who owns the media, why we have the biggest concentration
of press ownership, and that's by News - in the democratic western world.

I anticipate we will have a discussion amongst parliamentarians about this, about the best review
and way of dealing with all of this.

Good evening, welcome to Lateline, 'News of the World' revelations continue tonight with another
editor arrested in Britain. Also, Rupert Murdoch, his son James and their most senior British
executive Rebekah Brooks have Brooks have been called to give evidence to a parliamentary committee
next week. Could this be the beginning of the end of the remarkable influence Murdoch has had over
British politics, and politics Australia, for that matter? One man who has dealt with Murdoch
directly at the highest levels is former Prime Minister Paul Keating. What does he think of the the
unfolding scandal? Mr Keating will join us shortly and we will get his thoughts on the selling of
the carbon tax. And he fondly quotes his old enemy in his 'Just Say No' campaign.

Parliamentary committee summons Murdochs

Parliamentary committee summons Murdochs

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter: Philip Williams

Rupert and James Murdoch have been formally summoned to testify before a house of commons select
committee after rejecting a request to do so.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Rupert and James Murdoch have been formally summoned to testify before a
House of Commons select committee investigating the News of the World phone hacking scandal.

The pair had rejected a request to face the committee, however Rupert Murdoch says he will appear
before a separate judge-led inquiry announced yesterday by the British prime minister David
Cameron.

The head of News International, Rebekah Brooks, has agreed to appear and will face the committee
next Tuesday.

Europe correspondent Philip Williams reports.

PHILIP WILLIAMS, REPORTER: With every hour, another twist. The latest, a former News of the World
executive editor, Neil Wallis, has been arrested. He used to work as Andy Coulson's deputy, the man
arrested over hacking last week. And it appears police want to talk to a number of other
journalists.

And in a stunning development, a commons media committee has issued a summons to force both Rupert
and James Murdoch to appear before them on Tuesday. That was delivered by hand by the Deputy
Sergeant at Arms. Rebekah Brooks had earlier agreed to appear, but it's unclear what the Murdochs
can or will do now.

JOHN WHITTINGDALE, MEDIA SELECT COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: We have already been told by James Murdoch that
the committee has been misled in some of the statements that were made to it during our previous
inquiry.

Given the scale of the public anger about what has happened, I think the very least that should
happen is that Rupert Murdoch as the head of the company and James Murdoch as the chairman of News
Corp International should appear and account for what has been going on.

NICK CLEGG, BRITISH DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: My message to Rebekah Brooks, to the Murdochs is just do
the decent thing. You can't hide away from this level of public anguish and anger and indeed
interest.

PHILIP WILLIAMS: All of this follows a very bad day for the Murdochs, forced to drop their coveted
bid for BSkyB and blasted in the parliament by prime ministers present and past.

GORDON BROWN, FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Others have said that in the behaviour towards those
without a voice of their own News International descended from the gutter to the sewers. The
tragedy, Mr Speaker, is that they let the rats out of the sewers.

PHILIP WILLIAMS: Gordon Brown said he'd tried to get an inquiry going back in 2009, but encountered
resistance from within government. David Cameron has finally announced an inquiry.

DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: And there is a firestorm, if you like, that is engulfing
parts of the media, parts of the police and indeed our political system's ability to respond.

And what we must do in the coming days and weeks is think above all of the victims, like the Dowler
family who are watching this today, and make doubly sure that we get to the bottom of what happened
and we prosecute those who are guilty.

PHILIP WILLIAMS: The opposition has criticised the prime minister for his close association with
Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson.

JAMES HANNING, INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY DEPUTY EDITOR: He was keen to get into the Murdoch - you know,
to get sort of cosy with Murdoch. He did that. Socially he's very close, or has been very close, to
Rebekah Brooks, who lives two or three miles from him in Oxfordshire. They see each other most
weekends, I think. And it's very embarrassing.

He's backed the wrong horse.

PHILIP WILLIAMS: But News Corp's problems are not confined to Britain. Now US lawmakers are asking
the FBI and other authorities to investigate if American laws have been broken.

FRANK LAUTENBERG, DEMOCRATIC SENATOR: The law for an American corporation, which News Corp is, is
prohibited from using bribery for any reason. And here it's suggested that it has been used, and as
a consequence we want those who enforce the law to get after this, investigate it and tell us what
really happened.

PHILIP WILLIAMS: It's expected authorities will also look at claims the News of the World
journalists may have tried to bribe a US policeman to give them the phone numbers of the 9/11
victims.

With each day, this story evolves in ways that would have even challenged the creative talents of
the leader writers of the now defunct News of the World.

Philip Williams, Lateline.

Emotional Gillard tells of 'natural shyness'

Emotional Gillard tells of 'natural shyness'

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter: Tom Iggulden

Julia Gillard has described media coverage of the climate change debate as "crap" as she attempts
to loosen up and be more natural in public.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: The Prime Minister today used the "C" word, talking about crap, her word for
much of what's being produced in the media by the climate change debate.

It was part of an effort by Julia Gillard to loosen up in her public appearances and overcome what
she describes as her natural shyness.

Political correspondent Tom Iggulden.

TOM IGGULDEN, REPORTER: The conduct of some of Rupert Murdoch's journalists in Britain has given
Bob Brown an idea.

BOB BROWN, GREENS LEADER: A full inquiry into the media, both ownership and regulation, in
Australia.

TOM IGGULDEN: Mr Murdoch's man in Australia isn't so sure.

JOHN HARTIGAN, CEO, NEWS LIMITED: I'm hugely confident that there is no improper or unethical
behaviour in our newsrooms.

TOM IGGULDEN: But the Prime Minister's all ears.

JULIA GILLARD, PRIME MINISTER: And I will be happy to sit down with parliamentarians and discuss
that review that people are obviously contemplating.

TOM IGGULDEN: But she's already passed judgement on some media reporting of the carbon tax debate.
She singled out unchallenged opposition claims that the carbon tax would shut down the coal and
steel industry.

JULIA GILLARD: I'd say to you: don't write crap. (Laughs from audience). It can't be that hard.
(Applause from audience). And when you have written complete crap, then I think you should correct
it.

JAN, AUDIENCE MEMBER: I'm tired as well at the level of debate that's been going on.

TONY ABBOTT, OPPOSITION LEADER: It's been OK tonight, hasn't it, Jan?

TOM IGGULDEN: Tonight the Coalition's claims about the end of the coal industry were put to the
test in a public forum.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: When Senator Joyce and yourself were at the coal mine the other day, there was
almost a sort of semi-hysterical concern about job losses, and it seemed to me that you were
suggesting that that was going to be almost immediate. So, I come back to my original question:
what time span do you put upon closure of coal mines?

TONY ABBOTT: Well if it's up to me, they won't close, Vince. If it's up to me, the coal industry
will flourish.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: But what do you suggest it will be if the carbon tax comes in?

TONY ABBOTT: Well, that depends upon a number of factors including the continued strength of the
Chinese economy.

TOM IGGULDEN: By calling out Tony Abbott's claims via an assault on the media, Julia Gillard's
opened a new front in the carbon war. But it's not all attack, she's also trying to show us a
kinder, gentler Julia.

JULIA GILLARD: I am who I am and I guess I feel the need as Prime Minister to show some more things
about myself.

TOM IGGULDEN: And she did that through a heartfelt remembrance of being the shy girl at school.

JULIA GILLARD: I don't forget where I came from, why I'm here, or what I've learned along the way.
I don't forget Unley High, where I saw the kids at the back of the room.

TOM IGGULDEN: She says she's instinctively uncomfortable with the media machine that surrounds her
every day.

JULIA GILLARD: One of the things I've tended to do is allow decisions to speak for themselves
rather than trying to explain to people the motivations that drive me, and those motivations are
very deeply held and very sincerely held.

In the moment I truly believed I was going to be Prime Minister, I told myself, "Don't ever put a
hard call off."

TONY ABBOTT: Just because something is tough doesn't mean it's right. Now, just because people
don't like something, doesn't mean that it's leadership. That might actually be a form of
dictatorship.

TOM IGGULDEN: Something the formerly shy girl of Unley High School might not agree with.

Tom Iggulden, Lateline.

Keating blasts Abbott's carbon 'tripe'

Keating blasts Abbott's carbon 'tripe'

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter: Tony Jones

Former prime minister Paul Keating tells Lateline Australia risks falling behind developing
economies like China if it does not embrace new industries and a better quality future by pricing
carbon.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: To discuss the media and politics, I'm now joined in the studio by the
former prime minister Paul Keating.

Thanks for being here.

PAUL KEATING, FORMER PRIME MINISTER: Tony.

TONY JONES: Now Tony Abbott's fond of saying that unlike the reforming Hawke-Keating governments,
the Gillard Government has no real reform credentials, that carbon pricing is not a reform at all.
What do you say to that?

PAUL KEATING: Well it's a huge reform, Tony, a huge reform. Look, only prices and markets shift
these big things.

You know, people used to say to me, "What is the most important price in the economy?" And of
course it's the exchange rate. When the exchange rate changes, all sorts of things happen.

When we started moving to a floating exchange rate, whole new industries popped up. The first one
was international tourism; we never had one before. Then the international wine industry, then a
new domestic financial industry. Then education services from abroad, you know. Then exports of
high technology things.

I mean, this is - the price allocates capital in the market. Only a price on carbon will start
allocating capital to the right places, where we should be investing in the new Australian economy.

See, the question is, I think: do we want a first-rate industrial economy or do we want an economy
with a brown, fat underbelly? You know, do we want to get into the new age with the new industries,
or do we stay in the old ones, talking as Tony Abbott is talking about industries that were
important a hundred years ago?

TONY JONES: So, put another way, do you regard carbon pricing in the same way you regard some of
the great reforms, even acknowledged by Tony Abbott, of your era?

PAUL KEATING: I certainly do. I mean, I think - see, there is a view that the industries that may
come out of this are things we kind of have to do. We have to clean up coal, we have to clean up
water, we have to do this, we have to deal with nitrogenous fertilisers, we got to - as if they are
a problem.

People should see them as the new industries. These are the new Silicone Valley industries. This is
how the Chinese see them. You know I'm on the board of China Development Bank, which is the body
which is basically growing the whole of the west of China. They see the new industries as their key
new growth industries.

We won't have them here. I mean, the idea here that we turn our back on the new country, on the new
transforming Australian economy, by not letting carbon be priced and therefore capital allocated
properly is nonsense. I mean, the Abbott argument that you don't tax the polluters, you give them
money, you give the polluters money to change their bad habits, is tripe.

TONY JONES: Thinking about what Tony Abbott and others who oppose the carbon price are saying about
the Chinese, that in fact their emissions are going to keep growing, they're not serious about
green technologies, in fact they can't be because they've got to keep growing their economy.

PAUL KEATING: If anyone says that, they don't know China. I mean, the Chinese, look, they got
eight-lane highways into all their cities. All their cities are going to be connected by the
fastest trains. They have the most modern airport terminals, they will have the cleanest water
whenever they can get it, they will have sustainable industries, they're losing arable land,
they're going to maintain it, they're going to remove nitrogenous fertilisers.

I mean, China knows that the new tertiary industries are in the green area.

See, Tony, in this country, 80 per cent of people work in the tertiary economy, in services, in the
industry like - as we are tonight, in the service economy. And, the new industries, the green
industries, are service industries, not the old manufacturing.

Manufacturing's moved to the east. It's the service industries are the new growth industries. So,
to turn your back on the mechanism which allocates the capital out of the old industries and into
the new ones is to turn your back on your future.

TONY JONES: So, I mean, do you see these as traditional Labor reforms? Because your reforms, ...

PAUL KEATING: Yeah, Labor.

TONY JONES: ... the reforms of the Hawke-Keating era, the big one was enterprise bargaining, the
reduction of tariffs, floating of the dollar, the big privatisations, prices and incomes accord,
etc., etc., they're even lauded by Tony Abbott. But you're - do you actually see this in the same
terms?

PAUL KEATING: I do. And, look, the economy's in a massive transition. That's obvious to everybody.

The terms of trade are effecting a massive transition on us. And this pricing mechanism is carbon
is part of that transition, so of course it stands with those big changes, Medicare,
superannuation, the deregulation, the ones you mentioned. It's in that league. It's part of the
Labor tradition of change, the Labor tradition of the adaptation of the economy.

You know this - you know what Tony Abbott's policy is? "If you don't give me the job, I'll wreck
the place. If you don't give me the job, I'll wreck the place." And we're supposed to, "Well, Tony,
you better have it, you know, otherwise you might destroy it on us." I mean, Tony's got to have the
political judo chop. That's what Tony has to have.

TONY JONES: This policy is an all-or-nothing gamble for Julia Gillard, who it seems you think
should be judo chopping Tony Abbott.

PAUL KEATING: Well, what can you do with obscurantism?

TONY JONES: Well, first of all, it's an all-or-nothing gamble for him as well. Judging by the polls
and the public mood, it could go either way, but certainly right now it's going his way.

PAUL KEATING: Well, if a country wants to backs its way - countries make mistakes, Tony. Lots of
countries have made mistakes. If a country wants to back its way down the pathway of obscurantism
to keep the old, brown, dirty industries of the Industrial Revolution, the early post-industrial
revolution, which is what these are, then it doesn't want a growth future, it doesn't want higher
levels of income and it doesn't want to better allocate resources, it doesn't want to have a clean
environment, it doesn't want to have clean water, better forests, better - you know, simply be part
of the new age.

TONY JONES: Why is Tony Abbott's - given what you're saying, if the public took that view, they
wouldn't necessarily be supporting him so wholeheartedly. But his 'Just Say No' campaign appears to
be winning right now.

PAUL KEATING: Well, let's go - I mean, I've been through a lot of these ones myself. I fought car
companies, textile companies - you know, you name them, when the tariffs come down.

But you at it today, look at the results, you know. Do you think that Ford and General Motors would
have been giving us the cars they're giving us today if we hadn't have had low tariffs, if we
hadn't of taken away the effective subsidy away, if we'd have just handed them some money to do
better, as Tony Abbott's suggesting we do with pollution? Hand them some money to do better.

You'd still have the handles falling off, the old creaky doors, the low quality. I mean, you've got
the quality in Australian cars now because of competition, because the market's given you imports.
You know, you can get a Mazda, you can buy a Volkswagen, so therefore the Australian cars have
measured up to that.

Unless you have a market mechanism working, the idea that the Government can hand money out to
improve these things, which is the Abbott policy, is just - is bunkum.

But, by the way, what's the media doing about this? What about that sleepy press gallery of ours?
What are they ... ? I mean, is there no premium on quality? Is there no premium on good public
policy anymore? Do they just say, "Oh, he said that and then she said this. And they said this and
we said that." You know, where is the quality of the national debate and why isn't Abbott being
flogged by the media for this position?

TONY JONES: Well, we'll come to the media, we'll come to the media in a moment. But tonight, for
example, Tony Abbott was taken to task at a public forum in Brisbane for bagging climate
scientists, for bagging economists who support the carbon tax. And he was asked: why doesn't he
listen to these experts? And he was asked, who do you listen to?, and he said, "I listen to the
public."

PAUL KEATING: Well it's the jingoists answer, isn't it? Jingoism. You know, don't lead - don't
conscientiously lead the community or lead the nation, just follow along behind public opinion.
Well, you know, that's what ...

TONY JONES: Well he seems to be leading public opinion in this regard. I mean, he's saying that he
listens to the public, but he's leading the public, isn't he?

PAUL KEATING: Well, I don't think he is, Tony. No, he's not leading the public. I think the Prime
Minister's leading the public. And she's doing a level best, but she's, you know, getting support
in important places, but this is a very great reform. And if a country like Australia can't effect
these kind of changes, where does it leave us in the big game against the Chinese, the Chinese
economy, you know, all these other countries, most of Europe, making these important changes in
climate and climate science? Where does it leave us?

TONY JONES: You of all people know how hard it is to get a new tax put in. In fact, Tony Abbott's
stolen one of your best lines on opposing the carbon tax. He's stolen your own campaign line
against the John Hewson's new tax, the GST: "If you don't understand it, don't vote for it; if you
do understand it, you'd never vote for it." I mean, he's using your best lines.

PAUL KEATING: Yeah, well, that's - Oscar Wilde said, "Anyone that doesn't like flattery's never
been flattered."

TONY JONES: But doesn't this just go to prove how hard it is to actually introduce a new tax in
this country?

PAUL KEATING: Look, Tony, let's be clear about it: it's $30 billion in all coming from the
polluters. It's not the public paying the tax, it's the companies. Of the $30 billion, $15 goes to
the public, roughly, and $15 billion goes to new clean technology. Right? Just as it ought to be,
just as it ought to be.

It's not as if it's a tax on members of the public; it's a tax on the companies and the extent that
leads to increases in prices, they're covered by the compensation the Government are offering them.
So, I mean, it's a very, very well-thought-out scheme, and importantly, a very fair one.

TONY JONES: But surely some of this has got to do with the way the Government has sold this policy
right from the beginning. Months and months of ministers, the Prime Minister and everyone who
wanted to support this scheme having no detail to work with. That was a political disaster, wasn't
it?

PAUL KEATING: Well, it's very hard to get this stuff out and going when people know you're doing it
and yet you haven't got the detail out.

Now it's out there. See, for instance, the Treasurer's increased the tax-free threshold to $18,000.
That's a very big change, very big change. Half a million people will have a substantial benefit
out of that, mostly women, mostly part-timers - women. And of course, the increase in the tax-free
threshold of $18,000 goes to everybody, it goes to you and it goes to me, so everyone has a win.

This is a very big tax change, very big change. So until people see the detail, it is hard to sell
the stuff, but once it's out there - I mean, this policy change and the neatness of the
compensations, and, if you like, the justice of the measure, should really be applauded across the
media.

You know, if it gets this bad that it's that hard to get a plus for something this right, what hope
does a country have?

TONY JONES: Let's talk about the media then. Like all of us, Paul Keating, you've been closely
watching the unfolding News of the World scandal in Britain. Are we seeing ... ?

PAUL KEATING: I'm not glued to the TV over it.

TONY JONES: Truly not, but are we seeing the beginning of the end of the extraordinary sway that
Rupert Murdoch has had on politics, not only in Britain; in the United States and in Australia as
well?

PAUL KEATING: Well there's one thing that's clear for sure comes out of this and that is
self-regulation by the media is a joke. A joke. You know, I notice tonight John Hartigan talking
about the Press Council of Australia. I mean, people shouldn't have a right to appeal about
invasions of their privacy to some body funded by newspapers; they should have a right at law.

What we need, what we seriously need, which has been now recommended by the Commonwealth Law Reform
Commission, the Victorian Law Reform Commission and the New South Wales Law Reform Commission is a
separate right-of-action in privacy, a separate tort.

So in other words, you don't have a right of appeal to some body, you have a right to action, you
have a right to the law. In the end, the only regulator of this bad behaviour is the law. And, this
episode in Britain ...

TONY JONES: Well there's certainly no right to privacy in the law in Australia at this time. And in
actual fact, at a broader level, it's sometimes said that privacy will be one of the great issues
of our time, because of the internet, because of Facebook, Twitter, etc., etc. But it doesn't seem
that there's any chance at the moment you're going to get a consensus on this. Could the Murdoch
issue reflect into this debate in Australia?

PAUL KEATING: Well, I mean, Minister Conroy's now sitting on the Commonwealth Law Reform Commission
report. Very reasonable recommendations. It basically says if you had a reasonable right to privacy
and there are no public issues involved and they are infringed, you have a right of action at law.

For instance, those people in London who News International or the News of the World was asking the
police to finger by their movements off their mobile telephone, those people had a reasonable right
to believe that their free movement through London was their own affair, that they weren't to be
tracked by the police via the telephone system for the benefit of a newspaper.

TONY JONES: But do you believe this sort of thing only happens in Britain? I mean, could it also
have happened in Australia?

PAUL KEATING: It could have happened in Australia. In fact, your chief executive officer made the
very same point in a speech a year or so ago. He - I brought the quotation in, which is a point.

He said that - Mark Scott, "With digital surveillance, location tracking and genetic tracing
becoming commonplace, there's a very firm case for the law to allow people to protect their
privacy." Correct. Correct.

TONY JONES: Let's talk about the politics of this with the time we've got left. Do you think
Murdoch's News Limited is effectively at war with the Gillard Government?

PAUL KEATING: I think it's beyond doubt. I mean, when the Daily Telegraph yesterday is saying,
"Let's have a national election," why do we need a national election? We have an operating - a
clear operating majority in the House of Representatives, it's a stable majority, the business of
the Government is reasonable business, that is the controversial matter is putting a price on
carbon.

There is a consensus, it seems, in both Houses of Parliament for it. Why should there be an early
election, other than the editors of that newspaper believing that were there to be an early
election, the existing government would be defeated.

So this is why ministers are saying News Corporation is after - or News Limited is after regime
change. You know, I think, you know, how can you read it any other way?

TONY JONES: And do you believe, if that's the case, that it comes directly from Rupert Murdoch?

PAUL KEATING: Well, I'm not certain of that. I'm not certain. I think what matters to Rupert
Murdoch mostly is the economic performance of his organisation. I think the test for him is what
their EBIT, uh, what their earnings before interest and tax is, rather than the expression of
policy for every publication.

TONY JONES: And yet, dealing with Rupert Murdoch has been something that prime ministers have
always had to do. In fact you gave some advice to Tony Blair before he became prime minister on how
to deal with Rupert Murdoch, as reported by Alistair Campbell. "Murdoch is a big, bad bastard."

PAUL KEATING: No, I never said that.

TONY JONES: You didn't say that?

PAUL KEATING: No, that's some ...

TONY JONES: Alistair Campbell said ...

PAUL KEATING: That's some donkey who worked for Campbell said that. No, I never said that. No, I
said the only way to deal with any of these proprietors is from a position of strength. That's the
only way to deal with them.

And in which case, I dealt with them with the cross media rule. Right, I said, you know: if you're
in television, you can't be in print. So you look at what's happened now. Howard took the cross
media rule away to suit them, and now you've got West Australian Newspapers and Channel Seven
together. You know, you'll see more of this.

TONY JONES: Well, I mean, Bob Brown is today calling for an inquiry into media ownership in
Australia. Do you think there should be one?

PAUL KEATING: Well, inquiries into media ownership don't matter unless governments do it. The best
thing that the Government can do and Bob Brown can do is to support the Commonwealth Law Reform
Commission report for a separate law and tort and action in privacy. That's within their power now.
No inquiries.

TONY JONES: But that's got nothing to do with media ownership.

PAUL KEATING: Able to do today.

TONY JONES: That won't affect media ownership though.

PAUL KEATING: No.

TONY JONES: Do you think there should be a media ownership inquiry?

PAUL KEATING: Well, I think there's nothing wrong with inquiries providing they matter. But when
you take these things away - I mean, you know, when Murdoch took over the Herald and Weekly Times
group of newspapers, he lost control of HSV7, which they owned, therefore the Seven Network. I made
him sell down 010.

As well as that, the APN set of newspapers which are now controlled by the O'Reillys. He lost
control of the West Australian, for instance, you know. And you've just got to be hard with these
guys, you know? He said to me when we were doing this legislation, "But if I buy the Herald and
Weekly Times, why can't I keep 010?" I said, "Because that's not how the rule is going operate.
That's why."

TONY JONES: Let me ask you this, because we're nearly out of time: should the News of the World
scandal and the questions in Britain over whether Murdoch is a fit and proper person to run a major
broadcaster, should that affect the Government's decision, pending decision, on whether Sky, partly
owned by Rupert Murdoch, gets the $223 million public contract to broadcast Australia's overseas
television service?

PAUL KEATING: Well, that's portending - who can know what the course of these inquiries are? Rupert
Murdoch, I understand, has said he will appear before this inquiry, right? And so will other
officers of News International. When that inquiry's terms are finished and Ofcom, the British
regulator ...

TONY JONES: Oh, no, I'm talking about here in Australia. I'm talking about the Sky TV ...

PAUL KEATING: I understand, but - I understand that issue will be well and truly over before these
hearings are finished, wouldn't that be the case? I'm pretty sure that would be ...

TONY JONES: Well, Conroy's delayed it by six months, so in six months the Government has to make a
decision whether to give a $223 million contract to ...

PAUL KEATING: If there are important findings about these matters in Britain, it must materially
affect things here.

TONY JONES: Paul Keating, we're out of time completely. We thank you very much for coming in to
join us tonight.

PAUL KEATING: Thank you, Tony.

TONY JONES: As usual, much more to talk about, too little time.

Bomb blasts hit Mumbai

Bomb blasts hit Mumbai

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter: Richard Lindell

Three bomb blasts in the Indian financial capital Mumbai have killed at least 19 and placed cities
across India on high alert.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Cities across India have been placed on high alert after three bomb attacks
in the financial capital, Mumbai.

The Indian prime minister says it's too early to speculate on who was responsible.

The blasts all went off within the space of a few minutes during the evening rush hour.

At least 19 people were killed and more than 130 injured.

ABC correspondent Richard Lindell reports.

RICHARD LINDELL, REPORTER: Monsoonal rains only added to the misery as police combed the areas for
clues.

So far no-one has claimed responsibility.

For a city weary of attacks, the newspaper headline said it all.

(Newspaper headline for The Times of India reads: "YET AGAIN").

The latest blasts came as thousands of office workers were heading home in the evening rush hour.

The three bombs were detonated in a short 15 minute period.

The first struck the famed jewellery marketplace Zaveri Bazaar in the city's south.

A minute later a second explosion tore through the opera house business district.

And shortly afterwards a third bomb went off in the crowded Dadar neighbourhood in central Mumbai.

PALANIAPPAN CHIDAMBARAM, INDIAN HOME MINISTER: The entire city of Mumbai has been put on high
alert. I would appeal to the people of Mumbai, and people all over the country, to remain calm and
maintain peace.

RICHARD LINDELL: Police say the bombs appear to have been home-made.

The most powerful blast was near the opera house, in an area known as a hub for diamond traders.

Witnesses said many of the injured were missing limbs.

It's been three years since Mumbai was under siege for days, when gunmen attacked hotels and the
train station, killing 166 people.

Despite all the increase in security since then, bombers have once again struck at the heart of
India's financial capital.

In the past India has blamed Pakistan for failing to crack down on terrorists involved in previous
attacks. Pakistan's government immediately condemned these latest bombings and India's government
cautioned the country not to speculate as to who's responsible this time.

Security has been stepped up in major cities around the country.

Police have set up roadblocks outside Delhi's main airport.

Checkpoints have also been installed on major roads and at railway stations.

In Kolkata in the country's east, searches are being carried out in busy areas of the city.

RANJIT PACHNANDA, KOLKATA POLICE: All metro stations, market places, malls, multiplexes, hospitals,
hotels, iconic structures, government buildings, religious places, tourist places are all being
covered.

RICHARD LINDELL: The opposition says the attacks are a policy failure and a result of government
talks with Pakistan. But prime minister Manmohan Singh is calling for calm and has flown to Mumbai
to meet with the victims.

Richard Lindell, Lateline.

Greenpeace sabotages CSIRO wheat trial

Greenpeace sabotages CSIRO wheat trial

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter: Jessica Nairn

Police are investigating after Greenpeace protesters destroyed a field of genetically modified
wheat being investigated by the CSIRO.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Police are investigating after Greenpeace protestors destroyed a field of
genetically modified wheat in Canberra.

The CSIRO site was breached early this morning. The activists went on to damage half a hectare of
the plants.

The government science agency says it's still assessing how much the sabotage has set back their
trials.

Jessica Nairn reports.

JESSICA NAIRN, REPORTER: Under cover of darkness, Greenpeace protestors broke into this CSIRO
experimental farm.

Part of Australia's first outdoor trials, the grain has been modified to lower the glycaemic index
and increase the fibre content.

But Greenpeace is questioning the secrecy of the experiment and its safety.

LAURA KELLY, GREENPEACE: CSIRO haven't been forthcoming to this point with any information about
their corporate links to GM companies like Monsanto or the health and safety analysis they've done
before testing risky GM wheat on humans.

JESSICA NAIRN: The peak science agency has applied to conduct the nation's first human trials on
the wheat. Greenpeace say if those are successful, genetically modified bread could be on our
shelves by 2015.

LAURA KELLY: GM wheat has been rejected by Russia, the EU, even North America because it isn't safe
and it will contaminate our food supply.

JEREMY BURDON, CSIRO PLANT INDUSTRIES DIRECTOR: Our program in wheat is really focused around the
major global drivers of food security and food health.

JESSICA NAIRN: The CSIRO admits today's sabotage is a blow, but say it's too early to tell just how
much of a setback it is.

JEREMY BURDON: Until we actually know what the assessment comes out as, it's hard to say, but, you
know, if it sets it back by a year, then there's a significant amount of effort by people who've
been involved.

JESSICA NAIRN: It's the first time Greenpeace has destroyed genetically modified crops in
Australia. The action has angered some scientists and now federal politicians have joined the
debate.

LARISSA WATERS, GREENS SENATOR: We don't support criminal activity, but I think this point really
shows how strongly people feel about genetically modified crops.

FIONA NASH, NATIONALS SENATOR: When we're looking at the issues of food security, a global food
task going to increase by 2050, when we're looking at health issues, we need to make sure the
research is there, and that what was being done and it was just a reprehensible act by these
people.

JESSICA NAIRN: Police and the national gene technology regulator are investigating the incident.

Jessica Nairn, ABC News, Lateline.

Murray-Darling communities at risk from Plan: report

Murray-Darling communities at risk from Plan: report

Broadcast: 14/07/2011

Reporter:

A report into the Murray-Darling Basin Plan has found some of the smaller communities could be at
risk from proposed environmental cuts to water allocations.

Transcript

TONY JONES, PRESENTER: A report into the Murray-Darling Basin plan has found some communities could
be at risk if the proposed environmental cuts to water allocations go ahead.

The Murray-Darling Basin Authority commissioned the report into the social and economic cost of the
draft plan after the guide of the draft plan sparked anger in farming communities.

The report has found some smaller, irrigation-dependent communities would be at risk under the
draft plan and there was a lack of local input into its recommendations.

The National Farmers' Federation says the report needs to be taken into account when finalising the
new draft Murray-Darling Basin plan, which is due within weeks.

Looking at the weather, rain in Brisbane, showers increasing and the Rick of a storm in Perth,
shower or two for Sydney, morning followed by sunny day in Canberra and Hobart, mostly sunny in
member, Adelaide and Darwin. That's all from us. If you would like to the interview with Paul
Keating or review the stories or trips, visit our website. Ali Moore will be here tomorrow night,
I'll see you next week, until then, goodnight.