Godwin Grech, a hard-working and intelligent bureaucrat, has fallen foul of the gap between myth and reality in the senior echelons of Australia’s public service. The myth, fondly recounted by the mostly faceless senior bureacrats in Canberra, speaks of independence, impartiality and fearless advice. The reality is that your career only progresses if you do what your political and bureaucratic masters tell you to do or your career hits the skids.
At Senate estimates hearings on friday, it was obvious that Grech had decided to take the path less travelled and tell the Parliament and the public the truth as he understood it. His demeanour spoke of stress, intense discomfort, because he knew that he was about to break the unspoken public service code of silence and acquiesence.
Government senators and a senior Treasury official, all obviously well-briefed that Grech was a bomb ready to explode, tried desperately to protect Rudd and Swan from this rare, and very inconvenient, display of public service integrity.
Grech is a hero, or he ought to be, and an unlikely martyr. His career has been shredded, let’s hope his health and personal well-being do not suffer too much.
The Grech episode points again to the reality that there is something rotten, and delusional, at the heart of our political system.
Update (13.53pm): It’s got murkier and bizarre – ABC & the Punch.
Update (15.20pm): Gretch’s ‘more complicated role’
The Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty is expected to make a statement this afternoon concerning dramatic developments in the Utegate affair.
It follows a raid this morning on the home of the Treasury official at the heart of the controversy, Godwin Grech.
Mr Grech has been questioned by the federal police about a fake email which linked Kevin Rudd to attempts to help a Brisbane car dealer, John Grant, obtain finance.
Senior sources believe that Mr Grech’s role in the affair is more complicated than previously thought.
Update (16.20pm): The latest suggestion / rumour is that Grech faked the email himself – which just seems so bizarre. But it has been a weird day (in a genuine Hunter S. Thompson) sort of a way. People who have worked with Grech say that he is a straight up and down, can do sort of public servant – yet, he is at the centre of a truly mind bogglingly absurd episode.
Update: Tues 6.41am From Michelle Grattan: “The emotional Grech looked extremely convincing when he appeared before a Senate committee last week”. He put in, what we may see as, an extraordinary acting performance.
Update 24 June 8.52am: Godwin Gretch man of mystery and more
Update 25 June: Here is the editorial from the Australian which covers the point I was trying to make in this post (only in a much better and more comprehensive way) and it is one of the few sensible, and useful, things to appear in the media on this ‘affair’ so far:
IT will come as little surprise to learn that The Australian is in favour of public service leaks. The more the better. Whistleblowing serves the public interest, increasing transparency, enforcing accountability and protecting democracy. More often, however, it is senior politicians from both sides, and not bureaucrats, who would have most to lose from leak inquiries. Sir Humphrey Appleby’s view that the ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top is as true in the real world as in the fictitious corridors of Yes Minister.
It remains to be seen what the Australian Federal Police inquiry into Godwin Grech and the infamous faked email uncovers. As a matter of principle, charged as they are with responsibility to advise governments impartially, it is not the role of public servants to serve as operatives for either side of politics.
Such conduct, however, is a separate matter from legitimate whistleblowing. Leaks to journalists or opposition politicians drawing attention to corruption, gross incompetence, abuse of powers or other conduct against the public interest are important in the functioning of a vigorous democracy. Public servants have been passing sensitive information to trusted journalists and parliamentarians for generations. In fact, it would be difficult to believe that Kevin Rudd himself did not benefit from leaks in opposition, notably in relation to the AWB kickbacks scandal.
Unfortunately, political witch-hunts are nothing new either. One of the most disgraceful examples in the Howard years concerned former Customs officer Allan Kessing, who was accused of leaking details of security weaknesses at Sydney airport to this newspaper. Mr Kessing was hunted down by the Australian Federal Police, charged and convicted under Section 70 of the Commonwealth Crimes Act. He has continually asserted his innocence. Section 70, which carries a maximum penalty of two years’ jail, prohibits unauthorised disclosures by current or former federal public servants. Its repressiveness would test the courage of any whistleblower.
The Rudd government was elected on a welcome promise of “cultural change across the bureaucracy to promote a pro-disclosure attitude”. It is yet to make good, despite some progress, and the proposed whistleblower laws it is considering are disappointing. Instead of protecting those who approach the media in the public interest, they would only protect whistleblowers who approach the public sector hierarchy, unless exposing an immediate, serious threat to public health or safety.
As the investigation into the fake memo proceeds, the government and the AFP need to avoid any appearance of political interference. After just a few days, it is notable that the degree of information about the investigation contrasts with the blanket of secrecy about the deaths of five people after an explosion on a boat off Ashmore Reef in April. Mr Turnbull must of course co-operate with legitimate AFP inquiries but he also must be scrupulous about protecting any sources who may have assisted the Coalition.
At least 300 federal and state laws contain secrecy provisions for no good reason other than the Orwellian excuse that the laws provide for secrecy. Judicious leaks that expose vital information in the public interest are essential to avoid the encroachment of the secret state, to which too many authorities aspire.
29 Comments
Its looking like he was stressed for an entirely different reason after all
Indeed. But why did he persist, why didn’t he just stick to the Treasury line – ‘no email found’ – it’s the greatest own goal in federal politics for a very long time. Frankly, I’m bewildered
My goodness what a biased and innaccurate spin! This is the danger of blogging nowadays I suppose, having to sort the wheat from the chaff. What a fool you must feel now to find the email a forgery!
Juvenal, I think all would be wise to hold off making statements about exactly who will end up looking the biggest fool. At the moment it isn’t clear exactly how all the strange bits of the puzzle that have turned up will end up fitting together and there may be some strange twists and turns yet to come, in all sorts of directions.
I don’t think the original blog post was spin, even if it turns out Grech was up to no good (which is not clear by any means at this stage) good open accountability would have dictated that his testitmony at the senate hearing would have been less encumbered by the interference run by his superior (and possibly some Labor senators?). If we was telling the truth, it would have been better to have heard the whole truth, and if he was not then he would have been handing just a bit more rope. Either way the whole episode would have gotten clearer quicker.
It is all very strange though, and I really think it’s brave for anyone to make a clear call yet about who is going to lose the most out of the whole episode. That’s before the Costello angle has even been considered, which opens up an even greater can of worms, just when we all though it was finally all over…
Well I certainly feel foolish in the sense that not even a cynical, old, former public servant like myself could envisage a day when a senior treasury official would directly lie (if that is what happened, and the media reporting indicates it was) on oath before the Senate. The state of the public service may be much worse than I imagined. We need to find out what exactly did happen and what the motivations were, if any.
As to ’spin’, I think you let yourself down by latching on to that modish insult. Don’t forget that the Treasury officials didn’t know that Gretch’s role was more ‘complicated’ (to quote the police) when they went to such extraordinary lengths to shut him up. They might have been better advised to just let him talk. So in a key sense my criticism of public service secrecy, unaccountability and conformity still stands.
I’m sorry Trevor you are entitled to your own opinion. However I believe it is you who have “let yourself down” not to mention your readers. You, like a majority of the media have fallen into the “spin” accompanying this fiasco. News today sites sources such as youtube and wikipedia, or other media outlets! Where is the investigative journalism there? What ever happened to the media checking their sources? What ever happened to the oppostion checking to see if sources are accurate?
I agree about the lamentable state of investigative journalism but I am not now nor have ever been a journalist and this post like the rest of this blog is clearly opinion
I have been muttering the old line “given the choice between a cock-up and a conspiracy, 9 times out of 10, it’s a cock-up.” Looks like this might be the 10th time, except not the conspiracy some people thought (hoped).
And that’s the sad thing – both sides have taken this as an opportunity to have a go at the other. Mano-a-mano, one-must-fall sort of stuff.
Trevor:
then:
Which is it? You are surprised that a public servant would tell the truth, or you are surprised that one would lie?
Can’t walk both sides of the barbed wire fence, old son.
The distinction I’m drawing old sport is between a ‘direct lie’ – rare and ‘dissembling, obsfucating, ducking, weaving etc’ – all too common
Public servants like to avoid a direct anything – as do corporates by the way (read Don Watson’s excellent little book on the subject – because making a direct statement leaves you open to contradiction whereas mealy-mouthed words leave you hard to pin down and make it easier to slip out from under if unpleasant and inconvenient facts emerge in the future.
G’day Trevor.
I have to confess to having been sucked in by Utegate up until the police raid yesterday. As a former federal public servant and an adviser in federal parliament, the notion of a Treasury official lying to a Senate commitee is astounding. Even more so when you think of the full range of smoke and mirror options that are regularly used, the classic of course being “I cannot recall that Senator.”
And the whole affair certainly says something about the media and a political system that all too readily seek sensation over substance. Imagine the story that Steve Lewis might have broken had he built a more thorough picture of events?
This interview reveals a FEW things http://tinyurl.com/m2tz8b
Hi
This is for Godwin Grech.
I don’t suppose you will read this amongst all the furor but if you do…I believe you are a brave man. Hang in there. I don’t know you but I can imagine you are not in an easy place. You know the truth and that is all that matters.
The public service is an honorable place to serve. Not easy but honorable. I support you.
Unbelievably, lying to the Senate may be the least of it.
Truly it was a delivery, Kidman could only dream of
Nicole might be envious but Machiavelli would be impressed
Shame about the final act
From the cheap seats…
This little germ has been leaking Treasury data to the Liberal Party for years – not whistle-blowing, not going to the press, not anything even remotely honourable, just misuse of his position, to support his party of choice.
Martyr?
Many peole seem to think the public servant was being bullied by his superiors, if they had done a search and found no emails maybe they were trying to prevent “poor” Goodwin from digging a hole deeper. Body language – not once did this guy look up and maintain eye contact, not many good salepeople out there.
Well so you say Juzzy but maybe we should with hold that judgement until there is some evidence
Martyr my PIGS YARIS!! As soon as I saw that Gawky little slime-ball spruiking his verbal faeces, I immediately could tell he was lying. His whole demeanour was weak and pathetic. He didn’t look at all comfortable, convincing or self-assured. He looked like he was ready to curl up in the fetal position. Put aside that given his prominent position, you would hope this employee to demonstrate great character, Integrity and at least sound confident and believeable. But he just didn’t, because he just wasn’t telling the truth. I formerly lived in Wayne Swan’s electorate and have personally dealt with his office and have always found his office honest and helpful. That is what politicians are there to do, make enquiries and help people. To make an enquiry to see if someone can be helped is not out of the ordinary for any politician who is actually DOING THEIR JOB!!! Malcolm Turnball should be GONE and SO SHOULD “UNGODLY WRETCH”. I am appauled that my taxes that would be much better spent on good uses for my family, and to which we can ill afford, instead go toward paying rabid vermon like MR GODWIN GRETCH. Wish we could Vote em off!!
Dear smelling the coffee, if Wayne Swan was just doing his job why did he deny doing anything for John Grant when the issue first came up in Parliament? The distinction between heroic whistleblower and despicable mole seems to be a bit like the old terrorist vs freedom fighter distinction. The federal police are currently investigating these matters, but the ABC and many others seem to already know what the outcome will be. Hhhmmm.
Trevor – link for the very serious accusation you made against the Treasurer in 20?
Whistle blowers alert the public to issues of public importance. They don’t leak just for political advantage.
zoomster – I guess your link for serious accusation remark is a joke. But in case not – the point is that Rudd and Swan argue that they did nothing for Grant other pass on the ‘representation’ to Treasury. This is the utterly appropriate and proper position and why Swan has steadfastly denied doing anymore. Many people (listen to talkback) like smelling the etc simply assume that he did do more than that and say so what? In their view helping out constituents in a personally interventionist (tammany hall) sort of way is what we want pollies to do. It is the smelling etc of the world who are making the serious accusations.
Sorry, Trevor, genuinely puzzled now. In post 20, you accused the Treasurer of lying to Parliament (can’t see how I’ve misread that).
Zoomster, let me try again. Smelling the coffee (comment 21) like many people think Swan like other politicians should do stuff for electors on an individual basis. Most politician know this is wrong but they don’t like to disappoint so they make ‘representations’ ie pass on the request with a nice little and innocuous cover note. An essentially meaningless little courtesy. This is what Swan said he did in effect. My point is that if Swan really agreed with smelling the coffee (and that his job as a politician is to intervene on behalf of individuals) he would have simply said yes I did help this constituent that’s what I am here to do. But he didn’t say that. Now this whole saga, in relation to Swan, boils down to when a representation stops being a nice little political courtesy to keep the faith with an elector and becomes something more inappropriate (ie something smelling the coffee thinks any politician doing his job ought to be doing). Is a representation still a representation if it includes a phone call, or a fax to the Minister’s home from a bureaucrat and so on. This of course is an argument that has distinct jesuitical overtones and / or is reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s definition of ’sexual relations’ as something to be distinguished from engaging in just one or two sex acts.
Everyone worldwide knew sexed-up Bill had to be “lovin Lewinski” Blind Freddy down the street could see that. What I don’t get is why demonstrate your point using a sex case relating to a foreign former president? Is there not an example closer to town that you could have used to demonstrate your point? Or could it be that you used the “sex sells” mentality just to get more readers to read your (sorry but I feel) one-eyed views/or are you just a little bit too old and crusty to have clear vision? (Sorry, but in comment 5 you did call yourself a “cynical, old, former public servant”. In any case, the point that I was making in my comment was simply this, the people of Australia elect the politicians to SERVE the people. Obviously there are boundaries to which politicians are expected to work within. The so-called evidence (the infamous email) which was being used to suggest Mr Swan did anything that had crossed that boundary, was proven to be A FAKE! Surprise Surprise.
I’m sorry, Trevor, but the whole point of representative government is that you represent your electors.
I don’t know whether you’re having trouble expressing yourself or whether you simply mean what you say, but it sounds to me as if you think it’s wrong for a politician to help a constituent.
Err – that’s actually their job.
A politician who refers a constituent’s request for help on is NOT doing anything wrong and wouldn’t think for a minute they were. It’s their job.
A politician who refers a constituent’s request for help on is NOT performing a meaningless courtesy (if they think that way, they are a crap local member). They are doing their job.
It is a politician’s JOB to lobby on behalf of constituents. A good local member doesn’t just write a letter or make a phone call and leave it at that. A good local member checks that their ‘courtesy note’ has been acted upon, that the constituent has received a response, and that the constituent is happy with that response.
That’s the local member’s job.
FFS, what do you think pollies are there for??
I think Godwin Grech is a liar and deserves everything that comes to him. That said, it’s not surprising his name is mud and Turnbull is nicely avoiding responsibility.
There is a stereotype that public servants are overpaid fat cats … I have seen the long and hard hours that so many work to prop up the careers of our “elected leaders”. And when things go wrong, it’s the public servant who takes the blame. The public service loves a good paper trail, and in this high-tech era, it’s no surprise this senior public servant lived and died by the email.
The public service is utterly useless and should be dismantled.
As a serving public servant of over 20 years I miss two old mates, Frank and Fearless, seems like they have left the room.
The Canberra Times states that Mr Grech liked to mentor younger officers in the Treasury, the one piece of advice that he seems to have missed and one that all public servants should heed is, that when you are dealing with politicians – remember that “They are not your mates!” If they want information, that is what briefing notes and QON’s are for, oh yes and the information should be accurate delivered without fear or in Mr G’s case, Favour. Godwin crossed the line and forgot for whom he worked. Let us hope that, as his carcase twists in the breeze hanging from the gibbet constructed by his own hands, there are those watching who think long and hard about being mates with politicians.
Agreed Qreus, Grech’s email to Turnbull was as delusional as it was outrageous.