I despair sometimes, I really do. We heard yesterday from the Corngate select committee inquiry that the Prime Minister consulted her brother-in-law, a crop scientist, when she was first alerted to the possibility of an accidental GM release in November 2000. What we didn't hear - because no one reported it - was the evidence of arguably the single most important figure in the whole affair.
Yes, Russell Poulter, the Otago University geneticist who advised the government that there was no good evidence of GM contamination in seed test results - and thus played a crucial role in the decisions that were subsequently made - appeared before the select committee for an hour yesterday. I understand that TV3's reporter stayed for about 10 minutes of that hour, and TVNZ's left about five minutes later. [NB: I have discovered since this morning's post that this isn't correct - see the PS at the bottom of this post. RB] So far as I can tell, no news organisation has even mentioned that he was present. This is simply astonishing.
Even if you believe that Poulter is a knave, a fool, or both, his evidence was, by any measure you care to apply, of vastly greater significance than that of the PM's brother in law, Allan Hardacre, a peripheral figure who had no official role, relatively limited expertise and no access to official information, including test results. You would have to either not understand the story, or not want to understand it, to make the news judgement our media made yesterday.
3 National News, which had previously skipped lightly over the committee hearings, piled in on the Hardacre story, placing it high in its bulletin, with a live link to reporter Stephen Parker, who described his evidence as "compelling".
There is certainly some news value in Hardacre's appearance, not least because he was new to the picture. His evidence also indicated that, at least when she was first notified, the PM took a personal interest in the problem.
But the TV3 report ran close to misrepresenting what Hardacre said: his opinion that "the genie was out of the bottle" was actually a general one, and related to his belief that a tolerance level for GM presence was inevitable. As anyone familiar with the case will know, the issue of a tolerance threshold - or not - is quite important, but that was apparently too complex to be pursued. (To be fair, I'm now listening to a Linda Clark interview in which that point is being teased out.)
The chief executive and lawyer for the Ministry of the Environment - again, major players - also appeared yesterday. But nobody reported what they said either. This simply isn't good enough, and I do think TV3 has a greater duty than anyone else to keep faith with the public process that its own report set in motion. Otherwise, why bother?
On another tip altogether, the new Unlimited magazine is out, with my music industry story in it. I'm pleased with it, but this is the kind of yarn where you cop it less for what's there than what's not. So, sorry if you're not in there. I did 13 interviews, and only got in a fraction of what they produced. Quite a few people I didn't even get to. No Hayley Westenra or Nathan Haines, no Adam Holt or Michael Glading. Maybe next time.
Oh, and I'm happy enough to link to NZ Tabloid now that they don't have any children mixed up in the muck (their lack of archiving is also a wise move). Big news for this week - Mike from Flipside is doing it with Jodi Rimmer but admits he swings both ways! - plus a little more on the site's main public-interest news story so far, the possibility that one or more MPs who voted against the Prostitution Reform Bill are in fact keen customers at brothels. Even here, the utility of the gossip approach is pretty much over. Either someone's actually going to name and shame or it's over.
By the way, Jonathan Marshall, who clearly has a working relationship with the Sunday Star Times, helped broker the transfer of the videotapes that formed the basis of the paper's "rogue teacher" front-page lead on Sunday. A fee was sought initially, but the paper refused and, in the interests of doing the right thing, the two young men involved co-operated with the paper anyway. My understanding is that we haven't yet seen the half of the story of Takapuna Grammar's accounting teacher, David Arthur. Nasty.
PS: Mark Sainsbury from One News has been in touch with the following. I apologise for the error:
Russell… I despair sometimes too….. I don't usually respond to criticism of TVNZ but in your Gone Missing column you said you "understand that TV3's reporter left after ten minutes of that hour, and TVNZ"s left five minutes after that." I guess that must be a misunderstanding as my reporter Fran Mold stayed for an hour of Russell Poulter's evidence and only left when the committee was supposed to finish (12:30) because of a previous commitment. In fact Russell was there for and hour and a half. She then returned for the afternoon session. It’s a small point but given the time Fran spent in there she's right to be grumpy at being lumped into the couldn't be bothered category.