Adjudication No. 330 (April 1987) [1987] APC 17

ADJUDICATION No. 330 (April 1987)

On 30 July 1986, in an editorial entitled "A Costly Battle for Rockdale", the Sydney Morning Herald stated:

According to the environmentalists, the cost of diverting the expressway through Wolli Creek and Bardwell Park and around instead of through - Rockdale is an extra $24 million.

The editorial was published during the campaign for the Rockdale by election which was narrowly won by the Premier of New South Wales, Mr Barrie Unsworth. The Friends of Wolli Creek say that the figure quoted by the Sydney Morning Herald is blatantly incorrect. The society argues that the true mark is "ten times that amount".

In an earlier article published in July 1986 in the Sydney Morning Herald, the secretary of the society is quoted as saying the cost would have been $52 million, compared with $18 million through an alternative route. The society says that this was based on 1978 values; although the journalist was advised of this, this fact did not appear in the article.

On 30 July, 1986, the society delivered by hand a letter addressed to the Herald Letters' Editor, setting out its calculations of the cost of putting the road through the Wolli Creek valley.

The society argues that although the facts contained in the letter could have had a real effect on the voting in the Rockdale electorate, it was not published on or before polling day.

The society states that it considers that the behaviour of the Herald in refusing to correct its error, either by use of the letter or by the publication of the correction, was grossly unethical.

However, the editorial could hardly be described as one expressing partisan support for the Government. The figure quoted in the article was certainly not central to its theme, namely, the propensity of a government to spend in an electorate in what it regarded as a vital by-election.

The cost of the proposal had not been precisely determined, although the Herald has acknowledged that its figure of $24 million was probably a significant under-estimate. Although peripheral to the theme of the editorial, the question of the cost of the proposal was of very great importance to the society and, in its view, to the by-election. The paper made a decision not to publish a qualification of its figure, either in the form of a letter to the editor, or a correction. The Press Council considers that such a qualification would have been appropriate in the circumstances of a sensitive by-election.