Musing on Sydney's news
27 August 2003
Andrew Wilkie's employment prospects
Poor old Andrew Wilkie. Ever since he spilled the beans on the the Government's "sexing up" (I'm sooo over that term) of reports they received from the Office of National Assessment he's been in deep doo-doos. To quote him:
"The Government exaggerated the threat by taking the ambiguity out of it. For the want of changing a few words around... for the want of some subtle little changes, the threat was rebuilt."
In response, our mighty warlords, Johnny Winston and Alexander the Downer have accused him of:
Whew, that's an impressive list of failings. He must be a really, really bad man to warrant that kind of flak.
Trouble is, I can't help wondering why anyone would quit their cushy, high-paid and prestigious job to go into battle with some of the most powerful and manipulative men in the country, who have virtually silenced all opposition (apart from the SMH's Margot Kingston). Maybe he has a death wish? Or a fear of success? Maybe he jjust missed out on that plum promotion and is dirty about it.
Hey, I'm convinced. It's clear to me that this Wilkie man is a scumbag. A lying, hysterical, slanderous good-or-nothing piece of garbage. A bitter junior officer who would risk anything for a bit of publicity and the chance to show he can mix it with the big boys.
Oh, and did I mention that I'm actually Santa Claus's wife? My husband and I would be honoured if you would join us at the North Pole for a spot of reindeer pie.
After all, what could the Government possibly gain from overplaying intelligence reports? Not all that much, really. Just the chance to get in the good books with the most dominant super-power the world has ever known and the opportunity to bargain for that Holy Grail of trade ... a free trade agreement with the USA. Apart from that, not much else.
Johnny Winston was quoted as saying, "If Mr Wilkie has evidence that the Government misrepresented intelligence he should submit it. It is open to him to do so without breaching his legal obligations not to reveal classified information obtained in the course of his previous employment. To suggest otherwise is absurd."
He likes calling anything that questions his Integrity (capital I) "absurd" or "silly", doesn't he? But the point is, Andrew W can't produce the evidence because the Government has it - and won't release it for security reasons. So Johnny can play this "prove it" game till the cows come home. Too easy.
However, maybe ... just maybe ... our dishonourable Mr Wilkie was actually disturbed at seeing the possibility of young Aussies being sent into a dangerous war zone on the basis of distorted intelligence, and he felt strongly enough about that to say "enough". If so, he could hardly have behaved more honourably. If this is true, the guy deserves a medal rather than the bollocking he's getting at the moment.
Let's now look at the human dynamics of this little game of "you did too, no I didn't".
I have dealt with dozens of workplace bullying issues in recent years. I've heard the stories from both sides of the fence. Some bullying incidents happen because employers simply have no other weapons with which to deal with difficult employees, especially the ones who know all the rules (and how to stretch them to the limit).
I can also tell you with some confidence that that accounts for less than half of the complaints I've heard from bullied workers. Serial bullies - and many politicians fit that category - have a habit of dismissing claims of harassment against them as "absurd" and "nonsense" when the victim blows the whistle on them.
To clarify, let's take a little journey into the mind of a bully for a moment. The bottom line is that most bullies have an agenda. There are things they want to achieve on the sly. There are a number of reasons to bully someone. Some are just on a power trip. However, more often that not, the main reason for bullying is to make the victim go away.
Imagine you're a workplace bully. Perhaps you want to replace your victim with a good friend. Or maybe there's a certain "type" you like to work with and the victim isn't your preferred kind of person. Perhaps the worker has been in your employ for 9 years and 10 months and you don't want to pay expensive long service leave? Or maybe you want compliant workers who won't make a fuss while you fiddle the books.
To take a phrase from a recent ICAC report into the corrupt conduct of a government department: "... allowing a culture of fear and intimidation to operate within the organisation". Yup, just bully 'em into doing what you want. Works (almost) every time.
So if some peewee decides to rain on your parade by blowing the whistle on you, are you going lie down and take it? Hey, this guy is going to cost you that Caribbean holiday you planned to spend with your family! Are you gunna say, "Yes, I'm afraid it's all true. I confess"?
Hardly.
More likely, you'll fight back. You'll say it's a "distortion, exaggeration and misrepresentation". You might even cast doubts on the person's sanity or emotional stability, even accuse them of presenting their case with "ever higher levels of hysteria". First rule of combat - discredit your opponent.
Ok, now you've had a chance to see what it's like from the other side of the fence, you can now pop on your wig, bang your gavel on the bench, and make your own judgement.
But what of the fate of whistleblowers? An introduction to the Whistleblower's Handbook says: "The wrongdoing you uncover might involve corruption, injustice, theft or danger to the public. What should you do? If you do nothing, the problem will continue, lives might even be threatened. If you speak out, you may be attacked -- more seriously than you can imagine -- and the problem may still continue".
Which makes you wonder where that leaves Andrew Wilkie.
He's probably been a Federal public servant for some time. That little career is now all over red rover. Private enterprise? Certainly not in an organisation that hopes for any concessions from the Government.
Such is the fate of whistleblowers. They lose their careers and a lot of employers won't touch them with a ten foot barge pole because they're seen as "disloyal".
The fact is, every employer does some things wrong - we all do. We're human. So employers worry that a proven whistleblower will cause them grief for their misdemeanours. I think the child in a lot of us see whistleblowers as "bad sports" and "dobbers". Wet blankets. Spoilsports. Never mind that Andrew has probably turned a blind eye to lots of small shonky things in the past, but the danger of spilling young blood for political expediency was the thin edge of the wedge for him.
Whistleblowers aren't generally neurotic idiots who waste their energy fussing because you didn't dot your i's and cross your t's. They are courageous people who refuse to be cowed into serious corruption with serious consequences. And believe me, because I've seen someone try to blow the whistle at a former workplace of mine. It took a lot of courage. Personally, I would have just slinked off quietly and hoped it all went away.
What do you think is Mr Wilkie's reward for his courage and caring? He's been disavowed, reviled, discredited, abused and had his sanity questioned. So much for ethics in Government.
And so much for Andrew. I wonder how he feels about his former colleagues at the ONA, determinedly clinging onto their jobs, closing their eyes to the sham of WMDs "capable of being deployed in 45 minutes" and saying nothing to defend him? I guess he understands that they have families and mortgages to worry about. He's smart enough to know that his former workmates would doubt that they could change things anyway.
Perhaps he can rebuild his career overseas. It won't be easy to find a decent job out here now, and he can probably forget about the USA and Britain too. Maybe someone in France or Germany will take him on?
Personally, I'd recommend him as someone who can work under extreme pressure and won't dip his hands in the till. If that's not a good enough referee check for you then you'll just have to wait until he releases his memoirs ...
This site and all material on it is copyright © Grea Korting 2003