Adjudication No. 408 (July 1989) [1989] APC 21

ADJUDICATION No. 408 (July 1989)

Mr Tom Burns MLA complains to the Press Council concerning an article "Taxpayers may foot bill for ALP's costs" in the Sunday Mail, Brisbane, on 5 February 1989.

The article refers to a decision by members of the Queensland Government not to pursue defamation writs taken out by the former Premier, Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, and his .Ministers against Mr Burns and other ALP members.

Mr Burns points out that under Supreme Court rules, defendants can usually expect to have their legal costs awarded against discontinuing plaintiffs. As the writs were issued in the names of individual Ministers, and not the Queensland Government as such, the ALP's costs should in his view, be met by them in their private capacity, and not by the taxpayer.

Mr Burns complains however that both the headline and the article implied that the ALP would assume the role of "public-purse pilferer", while the Government decision to use public funds to pay its legal costs in the matter was seriously understated. As a result, he says, he was made to appear hypocritical and became the target of considerable public abuse.

In defending the article, the Sunday Mail maintains that the facts of the story were reported with complete accuracy. The article stated that both the National Party plaintiffs and the Labor defendants could ultimately have their costs met by the taxpayer. The leaders of both parties were quoted in the text.

The Press Council does not dispute the accuracy of the article- Mr Burns objection however is based on its failure to offer any background explanation of normal Supreme Court procedures relating to discontinued actions, and on the reporting of statements by the Queensland Premier which could lead to Mr Burns being seen as responsible for an unwarranted financial burden on the taxpayer.

Clearly the discontinuation of the actions was an astute manoeuvre by Mr Ahern, which left the ALP in a difficult position. Such realities of political life are not the concern of the Press Council. The Council believes, however, that the reporting of political events should as far as possible enable readers to reach informed conclusions about the tactics and motives of the different parties involved.

The Press Council does not consider that the Sunday Mail article met this standard. The quoting of Mr Ahern's reference to the Labor party "putting its hands in the public purse", and the omission of any explanation of Supreme Court protocol, worked to Mr Burns' significant disadvantage and reduced' the impact of any balancing comment from the Opposition Leader, Mr Goss.

The complaint is upheld.