A funny thing happened on the way to media reform

I was about to write a blog about media reforms in Australia when a funny thing happened … a leadership spill.
Actually, it was the leadership spill you have when you’re not having a leadership spill. The most important element in a spill, which is essentially a vote to challenge a leader, is a challenger. There was none.
I held off writing about the media reform bills until I was sure they were lost, and that happened just after noon yesterday. What I didn’t realise was this was a trigger for the spill. An hour later, the Arts and Regional Affairs Minister, Simon Crean, called a press conference – his second of the day – calling for a vote and almost demanding that Kevin Rudd take on Julia Gillard for the leadership.
There were two problems: Crean hadn’t locked in Rudd as a candidate, and he wasn’t sure whether Rudd had the numbers. Another hour later, Julia Gillard went into Question Time, saying there would be a leadership ballot at 4.30pm, and looking directly at Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, said: “In the meantime, take your best shot.” (Photo above: Ray Strange, The Australian)
Abbott took his best shot, a no-confidence motion in the government, but he couldn’t get enough votes in Parliament to suspend standing orders – which would have allowed the motion to be debated and voted upon.
Ten minutes before the Caucus meeting, Kevin Rudd told media waiting in the corridor that he would not challenge for the leadership, citing his previous commitment at the last spill: “When I say to my parliamentary colleagues and to the people at large across Australia that I would not challenge for the Labor leadership, I believe in honouring my word. I said that the only circumstances under which I would consider a return to the leadership would be if there was an overwhelming majority of the parliamentary party requesting such a return, drafting me to return, and the position was vacant. I am here to inform you that those circumstances do not exist.” In other words, he did not have the numbers. Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan were re-elected unopposed.
All this was done in three and a half hours – the time it takes for a long lunch. But there were no celebrations, and only one winner, Tony Abbott. Simon Crean was sacked as minister, Parliamentary Secretary Richard Marles resigned his post after he backed Rudd, and three other Rudd backers, chief government whip Joel Fitzgibbon, and Labor MPs Ed Husic and Janelle Safin, have also quit their roles as whips. This morning, Tertiary Education Minister, Chris Bowen, resigned, saying he had been a Kevin Rudd supporter and he felt it was the right thing to do. Bowen was a former Immigration Minister, and I once said to him: “There must have been times when you wondered why you ever took this portfolio.” And he replied: “Tom, now you tell me.” He was very cooperative with the media, as were his staff, chief adviser, James Cullen, and press secretary, Bill Kyriakopoulos. He will be sorely missed by the Cabinet and the media, but he will get to see more of his young family.
UPDATE: Since I posted this blog a few hours ago, there have been two more resignations by senior ministers. Resources Minister Martin Ferguson and Human Services Minister, Kim Carr, have quit after revealing that they had backed Kevin Rudd. And Mr Rudd has said he will not challenge for the leadership under any circumstances. Julia Gillard must have breathed a huge sigh of relief!
The leadership speculation about Kevin Rudd is over, since he didn’t have the numbers (and possibly the guts) to challenge, but the question mark over the Gillard government’s future is still there – until the polls improve.
Speaking of the government’s future, its handling of the media reform bills was said to be the main trigger for the leadership spill yesterday. Simon Crean criticised the process as did other Labor MPs. Only two of the six bills passed in Federal Parliament, and they were the least controversial. If handled correctly, the legislation could have gone much further.
The main problem with the bills was the man who had been trying to get them through Parliament: Stephen Conroy. The Minister for Communications should actually be called the Minister for Silly Talks and Miscommunications. The silliest of them all was this line in speech to an industry conference in New York last September: “If I say to everyone in this room, ‘If you want to bid next week in our spectrum auction, you’d better wear red underpants on your head’, I’ve got some news for you. You’ll be wearing them on your head. I have unfettered legal power.”
As Frank Sinatra might have said, if he knew Stephen Conroy: “If you can make yourself silly there, you can make yourself silly anywhere.”
The Shadow Minister of Communications, Malcolm Turnbull, summed up Conroy extremely well: “This is an extraordinarily incompetent minister, probably the most incompetent in this Government, and that’s a high bar of incompetence.”
When the Daily Telegraph compared the Minister to Stalin and five other despots on their front page, saying they all had something in common – trying to control the press – this was Malcolm Turnbull’s response: “The Daily Telegraph does not have the imagination to parody and caricature Stephen Conroy or make him look as foolish as he makes himself look foolish.”
And finally, Turnbull’s poisson de resistance in Parliament: “Senator Conroy, I put it to you, Madam Speaker, could not sell fresh fish to starving seals!”
CONROY IS THE MINISTER WHO SHOULD GO
Minister Conroy’s idea of selling the bills was appearing on various news and current affairs programs in the past few weeks, telling anecdotes like this one to ABC’s Insiders about evidence to the Finkelstein Inquiry: “And just finally, if I could, one more [bit of evidence], another head chair of the Australian Press Council, Professor Dennis Pearce: ‘Indeed we had one period where The Australian newspaper did not like an adjudication we made and they withdrew from the council for a period of months’. And Mr Finkelstein asked: ‘Was that a direct consequence of the particular adjudication?’ And he said: ‘It was indeed. They said our adjudication was wrong and they were not going to publish it, and they didn’t’.” http://bit.ly/WzWgWh
This proved nothing as it did not spell out what the adjudication was, and whether The Australian was justified in their decision. And it implies that other publications were acting in the same way. Conroy also decided to sell the media reforms to Parliament by saying they had to vote on all six bills by yesterday, and they had to take them or leave them. Finally, the Prime Minister had to step in as her minister refused to negotiate on the bills or talk to the media bosses who came to Canberra to discuss them. Pass them by Friday, or they’re off the table, he said in his usual non-compromising way. The PM realised it wasn’t working, and said she’d accept sensible suggestions.
The most sensible came from MP Rob Oakeshott, one of those troublesome Independents, who said he would vote against the bills, but told Sky News AM Agenda, the bills should be put on hold until everyone, pollies, media, and the public had a proper opportunity to look at them. Labor MPs also agreed (privately, according to David Crowe of The Australian http://bit.ly/WXVzHw ) with Tasmanian Independent MP Andrew Wilke, who said the bills were handled badly and more time should have been allotted for consideration.
Senator Conroy wasn’t willing to accept changes to the bills, especially the most controversial, proposing a Public Media Interest Advocate, appointed by the communication minister, with wide-ranging powers including the overseeing of standards applied to journalists by the Press Council and other self-regulatory bodies. Independent MP Bob Katter had proposed amendments that would have replaced the Advocate with a panel of 12 eminent citizens who would appoint three commissioners to oversee standards. Another sensible suggestion, but the PM could not sell the plan to the other Independents. Perhaps a communications minister with expertise in negotiations could have done so, but there wasn’t one available – on the Labor side of parliament, that is.
So the four bills were withdrawn – the two that passed dealt with a tv licence fee rebate, expansion of local content and rejection of a fourth commercial television network – the leadership spill went ahead, and Labor is not out of the woods, far from it. Media reform is off the table, and the tv network chiefs are saying in concert: “Common sense has prevailed.”
And, though the Prime Minister can never admit it, mainly because the bloke who nearly got her sacked is a leader of the Victorian Right and a key ally, the one person who should leave her Cabinet is Stephen Conroy, the Minister for Silly Talks and Miscommunications.
Simon Crean, Richard Marles and Chris Bowen have left the Cabinet, and they certainly brought more to their portfolios than Stephen Conroy.
The last word should go to Malcolm Turnbull, who asked the Prime Minister in Parliament this week whether she still had confidence in Stephen Conroy, given that … “(the) Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has presided over a $4.7 billion broadband tender that collapsed, a National Broadband Network that promised to pass 1.3 million premises by 30 June this year and is unlikely to reach even 15 per cent of that number, a compulsory internet filter that was abandoned, an Australia Network tender that was sabotaged and now a media regulation proposal that has crippled the government.”
Unfortunately, the Prime Minister said yes.

Raags to riches in India

“If I were to begin life again, I would devote it to music. It is the only cheap and unpunished rapture upon earth.”

That was Sydney Smith, English writer and clergyman (1771-1845), on music as an addiction. Manisha Jolie Amin also has a love affair with the raag, a type of musical form in India – the word raag meaning mood.

I don’t think I’ve ever appreciated what a raag is, but Manisha Amin certainly has, and her novel, Dancing to the Flute, is an ode to its beauty. The tale starts slowly as Kalu, a cheeky street orphan, plays a tune with a leaf rolled into a pipe as he’s perched in a banyan tree in the village of Hastinapore.

Along comes a healer, a Vaid (don’t worry, there’s a glossary in the back of the book), who hears the sound of music: “The sound, sweet and clear, rode the wind, snaking through the tree and down into the village.” When Vaid Dada offers to fix his injured foot, Kalu is reluctant because he can’t pay, but the healer gives him ten rupees and says his music will pay for his treatment.

Okay, you say, another one of those Indian novels, focussing on nature and art and folklore. Wrong.  Once you get through that lyrical first chapter, the story turns to Kalu’s entry into the real world of music, studying under a master musician, brother of the healer.

What sets this first novel apart from others are its well-drawn characters; the use of stories told to the author by her mother, and knowledge of the flute and songs supplied by her father, who played the instrument. It is also beautifully written, deceptively simple in its language, but layered with emotion and empathy.

Kalu loves the flute and wants to be a musician, but is torn between leaving his friends, Bal, a buffalo boy, and, Malti, a servant girl, in the house of Ganga Ba, his first benefactor, and going to the house of Guruji, a teacher, and world-class musician, to learn how to play properly.

After hearing Kalu play a plastic flute, the Vaid tells him: “Never be scared to play. This sound, this music is a part of you, just like the tears on your face. You cannot throw it away. It will not let you’.” He takes Kalu to his brother, who’s retired to the hills, tired of the travel and the cost of fame.

The relationship between Kalu and Guruji is one of the strengths of Dancing to the Flute. Ashwin, Guruji’s right-hand man, is another strong character. When the teacher agrees to accept the street urchin as his student, Ashwin says: “Listen Kalu, you have a gift. Vaid Dada wouldn’t have brought you here otherwise. You need to trust that. And Guruji will make a real musician out of you, Kalu, despite himself.”

Although Vaid Dada denies it to his brother, there is an element of Pygmalion to the story. Guruji teaches him to read and write and the value of books: “Books can teach you things, can take you to places you couldn’t possibly go otherwise. And they are the great equaliser.” And to prove it, when Kalu writes a letter to Ganga Ba, she brings in all the servants to
read it to them.

Amin as narrator tells the story of the wolf boy brought up by a pack of wolves in the jungle, and Malti back in the village remembers the tale, and thinks Kalu is just as interesting, “his foot, the miracle of its healing and his promotion to student from beggar boy made him newsworthy. She hoped he was finding the change easier than she imagined the wolf boy did, or than even she would have. Malti liked things to stay the same.”

RAVI SHANKAR A RAAG ROLE MODEL

Another interesting character is Martin, a Western musician, who has come to Guruji to learn classical Indian music after hearing Ravi Shankar play at the Cathedral of St John the Divine in New York City. Guruji takes Martin on so that he can teach Kalu as well: “I’d like him to be able to read, write and play music the Western way. Not so that he become a Western musician, but – and I mean this, Kalu – so he understands your world as you learn his.”

It was about this time in my reading of the novel that I realised it reminded me of that great Indian novelist, R.K. Narayan, who I first came across in the 1980s when The University of Chicago Press published a series of his books set in Malgudi, a city of his own creation. Graham Greene was a big fan of Narayan. In his praise, Greene talked about writers like Tolstoy, Henry James, Turgenev, Chekhov and Conrad “who hold us at a long arm’s length with their ‘courtly foreign grace’,” and then added: “Narayan (whom I don’t hesitate to name in such a context) more than any of them wakes in me a spring of gratitude, for he has offered me a second home. Without him I could never have known what it is like to be Indian.”

Here’s a little snippet from his first novel, Swami and Friends, published in 1935, about a protest against the British featuring the main character: “Somebody asked him: ‘Young man, do you want our country to remain in eternal slavery?’ ‘No, No.’ Swaminathan replied. ‘But you are wearing a foreign cap.’ Swaminathan quailed with shame. ‘Oh, I didn’t notice,’ he said, and removing his cap flung it into the fire with a feeling he was saving the country.”

I’m not saying Manisha Amin is at Narayan’s level, but this is only her first novel, and like the famous Indian writer concentrates on ordinary people like Malti and Bal and those who gather outside the gate of Guruji’s house to listen to Kalu play. And she takes on tough issues like arranged marriages – Malti’s unhappy union with a man who left her alone until dawn on her wedding night. Amin uses the character of Guruji to teach Kalu valuable lessons about life. After a tragic event, he tells his student: “You will never forget this pain. I know nothing I say will truly make a difference to you at this point. But you can take your experiences and choose how they change you.” That last line is reminiscent of what playwright Arthur Miller said to the writer Joe McGinniss in his book Heroes: “To exist constantly in a state of controlled hysteria. It’s agony. But everyone has agony. The difference is that I try to take my agony home and teach it to sing.” (Joe McGinniss will be speaking about his book on Sarah Palin at the Sydney Writers’ Festival next weekend: http://bit.ly/Hc1ni3 )

The scenes at the end of the book between Kalu and Malti and Bal and Guruji are so moving, I had to wipe away the tears. Unfortunately, that means I can’t give you any details, otherwise it will spoil the ending. All I can say is that there is a lot of dancing to the flute in the final chapter. And Kalu finds that “the real gift he’d been given wasn’t the flute itself, but the way it had helped him to find the people he needed most.”

My only complaint, and it’s a minor one, is that I had trouble understanding the explanations of the raag, with its aalaaps and jors and antaras and bol bandhs which introduce each section of the book – all written by Guruji. I don’t know much about music, except that it can make me happy and move me to tears, but these standfirsts slowed me down, particularly at the end – except the last line of the final introduction to the last part: “It’s the release of breath that the audience makes as the last note dies away.” That I can understand, but I’d suggest putting it all in an introduction so that readers can go back to it, if necessary, as they would with the glossary. And, to be fair, the author has provided a list of books and articles about the music in the novel after the acknowledgements, for those interested.

Speaking of acknowledgements, they are lovely. Born in Kenya and a frequent traveller to India, Manisha Jolie Amin thanks her family for help on the Indian background – the Gujarati language, the songs, the stories et al. She writes: “This book would never have been written had I not experienced the beauty of the raag. My sincere thanks to the musicians that dedicate their life to this form of music.”

I’d like to thank them, too, for making this book possible.

Dancing to the Flute, Manisha Jolie Amin, Allen & Unwin, 342 pages, $29.99

Sarah Ferguson at Press Freedom Dinner

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

Before I go, a brief wrap on the Media Alliance’s Press Freedom Dinner in Sydney last week. The highlights were the speeches by Laurie Oakes of Channel Nine and Sarah Ferguson of the ABC’s Four Corners – Gold Walkley winners and passionate journalists. Laurie spoke about how the Convergence Review Committee absorbed the work of the Finkelstein inquiry and was well received – “mainly because it recommends an industry-led body to oversee standards, rather than the dreaded statutory authority favoured by Finkelstein.” Laurie Oakes also made the important point that public trust in the media is declining and we need to rebuild that trust.

Sarah’s speech was the “best ever,” in my opinion, on how press freedom often depends on non-journalists like bloggers and citizen journalists and activists like Lyn White of Animals Australia, who shot the footage of cattle slaughter in Indonesia, before Four Corners took their own for their story A Bloody Business. She blasted newspapers and television stations for running stories alleging the ABC’s animal footage being fake, and ABC 24 for repeating the stories without calling her or the producer to check. And she told the lovely story about Hussain Nasir, an Iraqi refugee, who helped Four Corners with their 2010 report, Smugglers’ Paradise, wearing a hidden camera into some of the most dangerous places in Indonesia. A former operative with US Special Forces in Iraq, Hussain told Four Corners: “I must destroy these bad people and the people behind them.” During the course of the program, Hussain risks his life and helps expose six major people smugglers. The UNHCR approves the resettlement of him and his wife and four children, and his family eventually gets to Australia. At the last minute, his resettlement is cancelled. Four Corners and the ABC then worked hard to get him here … and there is a happy ending. During her speech, Sarah Ferguson introduced Hussain Nasir, who was sitting at the ABC table, to the Press Freedom Dinner audience, and he received a long and well-deserved ovation. Bravo Sarah Ferguson, Four Corners and Hussain Nasir.

Lest we forget: Chris Warren, the Federal Secretary of the Media Alliance, told the dinner that 106 journalists and media personnel were killed last year, according to the International Federation of Journalists. For many journalists, the freedom of the press is a cause to die for.

Update: Saturday 5.40pm AEST. And the Newseum in Washington DC will rededicate its Journalists Memorial on Monday, May 14 at 10am (midnight Tuesday Australian EST), honouring journalists and media personnel who died covering the news in 2011. Among those honoured will be reporter Paul Lockyer and cameraman John Bean of the ABC, who were killed in a helicopter crash, along with their pilot Gary Ticehurst, in South Australia last August. Paul Lockyer’s sons, Nicholas and Jamie, will be attending the ceremony on Monday. The memorial honours 2,156 reporters, photographers, broadcaster and news executives from around the world, dating back to 1837. The CEO of the Newseum, James C. Duff, said: “The Newseum is proud to honour these journalists who paid the ultimate sacrifice in pursuit of the truth.” Hear, hear!

Update: Friday, May 18, 2.49pm And here’s how the ABC AM program covered the moving ceremony on Tuesday morning (Australian time): http://bit.ly/L1WaeO