When the science makes you look bad, simply bully the scientists into submission. This morning, the ABC revealed the Australian Institute of Marine Science had released a report on the health of the Great Barrier Reef ahead of time and leaked it to sympathetic media outlets, following pressure from Environment Minister Sussan Ley’s office.
Documents released under Freedom of Information laws show the independent statutory authority’s release of the report was brought forward to coincide with Ley lobbying UNESCO to reverse a threat to declare the reef “at risk”.
It’s another instance of the Coalition’s questionable relationship with scientific bodies, and a public service all too responsive to the political objectives of ministers.
The background
For years, the Great Barrier Reef has become another battleground in the Coalition’s culture war on climate change. It is obvious the reef is in serious danger — it has lost half its coral since 1995. In 2019, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park downgraded its assessment of the reef’s health from “poor” to “very poor”.
But Ley, and the Coalition, have repeatedly tried to downplay the risk to the reef. In June, when UNESCO threatened to declare the reef “in danger” — because the science very clearly says it is — the government complained and blamed China.
Ley then went on an ultimately successful lobbying tour to convince the world the reef wasn’t under threat. UNESCO’s decision, however, simply spared Ley some short-term embarrassment. The body’s world heritage committee will consider an updated report from Australia on the reef’s health next year.
AIMS were dragged into the thick of Ley’s lobbying campaign. In their internal correspondence, staff describe the process of releasing the early report to The Australian as a “leak.”
“It’s not ideal but we have to comply,” the agency’s CEO Paul Hardisty said in correspondence.
News Corp publications then selectively represented AIMS’ findings to argue that reports of the reef’s death had been exaggerated. But the organisation’s own scientists said any positive findings about coral growth were not part of a long-term trend.
Greens Healthy Oceans Spokesperson Peter Whish-Wilson said the pressure on AIMS and UNESCO was a “sorry crusade” to cover for the government’s reputation on climate change.
“If a federal minister can distort a scientific outcome to suit their government’s agenda and not be held to account, we are doomed,” he said.
But while AIMS is an independent agency, kowtowing to the minister is exactly what their enabling legislation allows for. The agency’s powers to do things necessary to its functions — which include carrying out research and development relating to marine science — are all subject to any directions by the minister. Ley is well within her rights to tell them what to do.
Government ‘politicising science’
AIMS’ capitulation is hardly surprising. Instead it’s another instance of how politicised the Coalition’s relationship with science is. In 2019, the government pushed a Senate inquiry over farm runoff into the reef, which effectively undermined the conclusions from its own scientific experts. Two years later, they’ve gotten the experts to bend to their will.
Government scientific agencies face a choice between carefully toeing the party line, or facing sustained attacks from grandstanding Senators. As Crikey reported last week, the Nationals have recently ratcheted up their attacks against the CSIRO, over tenuous research links to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and its support for fake meat.
Whish-Wilson told Crikey the Morrison government’s consistent interference with scientific processes to suit political objectives was an attempt to “gaslight the world”.
“How would you feel being a scientist who has had your life’s hard work bastardised by a government intent on abusing it for their own political ends?” he said.
“It’s not ideal but we have to comply,” the agency’s CEO John Hardisty said in correspondence.
I’d really like to know what Hardisty means by “we have to comply”.
At one end of the scale he might just be saying he’s gutless and he falls over to do the government’s bidding at the first hint a minister would like a favour, but rather than admit his own weakness he prtends there is some sort of irresistible imperative.
At the other end of the scale perhaps the government has made it clear that the Australian Institute of Marine Science will be defunded and scrapped, and its senior people hounded into destitution, if it defies the government in any way. Or some other equally overwhelming threat was used. While you might still wish Hardisty had a backbone, there would be room for some understanding. It’s rare to find someone who can take that kind of pressure.
The truth is probably somewhere imbetween. If there were threats, for example, it is likely they were not really explicit, more along the lines of ‘I know where you live’, or ‘This is a nice Institute, be a shame if something happened to it’. I hope we find out, preferably in time for the next election. And in ther meantime there should be an end to describing any of these agencies as “independent” except when there is clear and convincing evidence. The default assumption should be that they are all run by Hardistys and they all say whatever the government tells them to say.
This is how the mafia works.
“But while AIMS is an independent agency, kowtowing to the minister is exactly what their enabling legislation allows for. The agency’s powers to do things necessary to its functions — which include carrying out research and development relating to marine science — are all subject to any directions by the minister. Ley is well within her rights to tell them what to do. ”
Sounds like the legislation itself gives the minister powers here.
If that’s an accurate description of the set up, and I have no reason to say otherwise, there is no excuse for calling these agencies independent. They have no meaningful independence.
One other point – being subject to directions by a minister does not mean being required under law to do anything the minister says, asks or hints at. This came up, for example, in relation to the Bridget McKenzie rorts scandals. When a minister issues a direction it has to be done in the correct formal and proper way, otherwise it’s not a direction. If Hardisty received a direction he would definitely know about it and he would able to show the direction to anyone that wants to see it.
Science is already something many view with suspicion, the executive of AIMS have shot themselves in the foot. They are now less scientific and as one of the posts here suggest we should now treat everything they put out very carefully indeed. Prostituting their own work for political expediency will not stand their reputations in good stead. It is disappointing none the less to see the rot set it.
Go with the former. No one makes a comment such as that without qualification.
Environment minister (so called). Travelled the world to lobby and threaten others to support their criminality. What staggers me as whatever this rating is, it makes not one iota of difference to the looming catastrophe. I’m sure she came home and the cabinet is all congratulating themselves over a cigar and bottle of Champers on how they have managed to deflect successfully once again. A mob with no morals, conscience or public interest in their faintest dreams…..
“Barrier Reef: Ley stunned by 22 years of warnings”, The Saturday Paper July 3-9.
Excellent Norman Swan interview on ABC Health Report the other day, regarding the same sort of thing with the Doherty report, and how it only relates to Morrison’s “Delta Dawn” spring offensive in the bits where it fits in with his political aims….while crucial details and caveats are completely ignored. It’s quite alarming, considering the potential calamity that could be unleashed by foolish decisions.
The interview is on the ABC website, titled “Have we misunderstood the Doherty modelling?”, and it’s ten minutes of very interesting and expertly informed conversation, i can highly recommend giving it a listen.
On the subject of gaslighting in general, I predict Morrison’s next move will be the swapping of “victim/offender” roles, as he tries to make disappear the fact that it was he and Gladys B. who created this major crisis for the nation – and reframe the scenario so it’s actually the non-Covid states who are the bad guys, selfishly wanting to hold on to their virus-free status. “I dropped my ice-cream in the sand, now you all have to drop your ice creams in the sand too, to make me feel better.”
Susan ley what a toad, using taxpayers money to fly to the gold coast to buy a rental property and using her travel allowance hiring planes to keep up here light aircraft licence
If you take a look at her lips she more resembles a clam.
I think that from now on, any pronouncement coming out of AIMS about the health of the Great Barrier Reef would need to be treated with some degree of suspicion. This could also be the case for CSIRO, another government “hired gun” organisation. In future, if you want an honest opinion on the state of the Reef, I suggest that you look to Terry Hughes from JCU.