DOCSLIB.ORG

Read Gerard Henderson's Correspondence with Media Watch

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Read Gerard Henderson's Correspondence with Media Watch 1 On 28 August 2006 Media Watch included these references to Gerard Henderson amongst its comments on media coverage of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the conviction of Jack Thomas. And Gerard Henderson said the verdict drew a line between those who get the problem of terrorism and those who don't. Unanimous verdict in democracy divided The Thomas case outlines the division between civil libertarian types (trial lawyers, artists, humanities academics, comedians and the like) who focus on legal process and others who take terrorists at their word and regard them as a genuine threat to democratic societies. — Sydney Morning Herald, Unanimous verdict in democracy divided, 22nd August, 2006 Well it goes without saying that if you're with the comedians you're not taking this seriously enough. But Mr Henderson went further and queried the background of one of the three Appeal Court judges, Justice Maxwell. According to Who's Who in Australia, he is a former staffer to a federal Labor attorney-general and a past president of Liberty Victoria. Maxwell was appointed to his present position by Steve Bracks's Labor Government, which has good relations with the civil liberties lobby. — Sydney Morning Herald, Unanimous verdict in democracy divided, 22nd August, 2006 And he wasn't alone. 2 Here's Alan Jones, parroting Gerard Henderson, on 2GB. Mr Justice Maxwell in the Court of Appeal was a former staffer to a federal Labor attorney-general, a past president of Liberty Victoria, appointed by the Bracks Labor government. Do these judges bring their baggage with them as well in the determinations that they reach? — Radio 2GB, Breakfast show, 23rd August, 2006 But the commentators weren't all of one view… [read or view the whole story here http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1726396.htm] Media Watch’s passing reference to Gerard Henderson provoked this email from him. TO : PETER McEVOY Executive Producer, Media Watch - ABC FROM : GERARD HENDERSON DATE : 31 AUGUST 2006 Dear Peter Background As you may, or may not, recall – on a couple of occasions in the past decade you have asked me whether I would like to be considered as a presenter of the ABC TV Media Watch program. I have no idea whether I would have got the gig – frankly, I very much doubt it. However, as you will recall, on both occasions I declined to express an interest. My position was that the Media Watch format was tired. I proposed that, instead, Media Watch should have two presenters and that it should be the occasion of debate and discussion about journalism – rather than a pulpit from which a presenter lays down the Media Watch line. You indicated to me that ABC TV was committed to the current format – and that was that. 3 Media Watch and Jack Thomas As you are aware, Media Watch devoted most of its program on Monday 28 August 2006 to fanging critics of the Victorian Court of Appeal’s decision in The Queen v Joseph Terrence Thomas (2006 VSCA 165). Monica Attard criticised – in order – The Australian (particularly editor- in-chief Chris Mitchell and legal affairs editor Chris Merritt), myself, broadcaster Alan Jones and finally Peter Faris QC. Naturally enough, she disagreed with all of the above. Then Ms Attard praised the likes of The Australian’s reporter Mike Steketee, Sydney Morning Herald columnist Richard Ackland and, in passing, the Crikey newsletter along with The Age. Naturally enough, she agreed with all of this group. At least there was debate on this issue in The Australian, the Sydney Morning Herald and Crikey (but not The Age). However, Media Watch did not even concede that those who were critcised by Monica Attard had any case at all. They were dismissed as simply wrong. Just like the Pope ruling against those who do not follow orthodoxy, as defined by the Vatican. As you will be aware, I was not contacted by Media Watch prior to last Monday’s program going to air. Nor was I given any opportunity to state my case on the program – or even on the Media Watch website. The continuing Media Watch format suggests that you are not interested in debate and discussion on the program. Even so, I wish to put on record the comments I would have made had you approached me before Ms Attard editorialised against me. This is the only possible means of doing so – since Media Watch allows no right of reply on (taxpayer funded) ABC television. First up, Monica Attard bagged me for writing the following in my syndicated column on 22 August 2006 viz: The Thomas case outlines the division between civil libertarian types (trial lawyers, artists, humanities academics, comedians and the like) who focus on legal process and others who take terrorists at their word and regard them as a genuine threat to democratic societies. 4 Ms Attard dismissed my comment – not with argument, but, rather with ridicule – by commenting: “Well, it goes without saying that if you’re with the comedians you’re not taking this seriously enough”. This put- down, delivered with a smirk, overlooks the fact that there is a division within Australian society along the lines set out in my column. On the evidence of her performance last Monday, Ms Attard belongs to the civil libertarian types. I doubt that she would deny this. Following her put-down and attempt at humour, Monica Attard then moved to her essential charge against me. Her editorial comment was followed by a quote from me – as set out below: Monica Attard: But Mr Henderson went further and queried the background of one of the three Appeal Court judges, Justice Maxwell: Gerard Henderson: According to Who’s Who in Australia, he is a former staffer to a federal Labor attorney-general and a past president of Liberty Victoria. Maxwell was appointed to his present position by Steve Bracks’s Labor Government, which has good relations with the civil liberties lobby. The fact is that this quote was not in context. Had Ms Attard excised her attempt at humour, she would have had time to quote from my entire comment about Justice Maxwell – which read as follows: These days it is fashionable in civil liberties circles to analyse the background of High Court judges. Let's try the same practice with the Victorian Supreme Court, for a change. Take the Court of Appeal president, Maxwell, for example. According to Who's Who in Australia, he is a former staffer to a federal Labor attorney- general and a past president of Liberty Victoria. Maxwell was appointed to his present position by Steve Bracks's Labor Government, which has good relations with the civil liberties lobby. Intellectual Dishonesty A comparison of the two quotes underlies Media Watch’s intellectual dishonesty in this instance. Ms Attard dressed me down for daring to query the background of one of the three Appeal Court judges, Justice Maxwell. However, a reference to the full quote would have revealed that I actually wrote that if it was okay to analyse the background of High 5 Court judges – then it was worth trying the same practice with the Victorian Supreme Court. As you should be aware, it has been a common practice for commentators to look at the background of the Howard Government’s appointments to the High Court of Australia – namely Murray Gleeson, Ian Callinan, Dyson Heydon and Susan Crennan. Is Media Watch really editorialising that it would be improper to even mention Justice Callinan’s background before his appointment to the High Court by the Howard Government? Almost certainly not. Or is Media Watch really saying that it is okay to analyse the background of judges appointed by the Coalition government in Canberra but not those appointed by the Labor government in Melbourne? Apparently so. Then there is the matter of public interest. In view of the role played in the current debate by Liberty Victoria as a critic of the Coalition Government’s national security legislation (which enjoys broad support from the Labor Opposition) – surely readers of the Sydney Morning Herald and The West Australian are entitled to know that Chris Maxwell was a president of Liberty Victoria before his appointment as President of the Victorian Court of Appeal. Why should readers be denied this knowledge? It is not as if, when president of Liberty Victoria, Chris Maxwell refrained from a vigorous – and at times, hyperbolic – involvement in the public debate. Mr Maxwell, as he then was: (i) opposed the need for a new offence of terrorism, described the Howard Government’s proposed counter terrorism measures as “intellectually dishonest and profoundly worrying” and even asserted that the legislation was “redolent of Stalinist Russia” (The Australian, 24 December 2001). He also depicted any move by the Attorney-General to detain terrorists for a limited period as “more redolent of the KGB than of Australian civil society” (ABC Radio, The World Today, 28 November 2001). Media Watch’s intellectual dishonesty did not end there. In her editorial, Monica Attard gave the impression that there was only one valid legal position in this instance – namely that of the three Court of Appeal judges who sat on The Queen v Thomas. She did not mention that the Court of Appeal overruled the decision of the experienced trial judge, Justice Philip Cummins, who sat in the case at first instance – DPP v Thomas (2006 VSC 243). Sure, the Court of Appeal overruled Justice Cummins – but this was no reason for Ms Attard to ignore the decision which led to the appeal. Justice Cummins, who was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1988, is a very experienced judge – and he held that Jack Thomas’ statement to the Australian Federal Police was voluntary.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I Should Say, at the Outset of This Function on the Senate Side Of
    I should say, at the outset of this function on the Senate side of Parliament House, that my subject today—former Tasmanian premier and Australian prime minister Joseph Lyons—was not all that enamoured with upper houses for much of his political career. As a Labor premier of Tasmania, he stood up to the Tasmanian Legislative Council in the 1920s over its financial powers. On a couple of occasions he even managed to by- pass the Council entirely. (How many prime ministers would like to be able to do that these days?) As well, during Lyons’ first two years as a federal minister in the Scullin Government, he faced strong opposition from the Nationalist Party dominated Senate. But then Joseph Lyons moved to stand with the conservatives in 1931. Thereafter, upper houses became more to his liking. Of course—that’s a long time ago and upper houses today cannot be relied upon so easily to reflect the conservative side of politics. As we know well … I am here to discuss one of Australia’s longest serving and most popular prime ministers. And, yet, it has taken some seventy years to get to a point of acknowledging this in the national record. As I discovered on researching his biography, Lyons has been shoved off to some remote region of forgetfulness— thought of as a prime minister who achieved little and was merely used by stronger forces to win elections. This legacy has stalked the memory of J. A. Lyons—as he was wont to sign on documents. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Out of Local News: Implications for an Informed Public
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons School of Communication: Faculty Publications and Other Works Faculty Publications 9-2013 Taking the ‘Local’ out of Local News: Implications for an Informed Public Lee Hood Loyola University Chicago, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/communication_facpubs Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Hood, L. "Taking the ‘Local’ out of Local News: Implications for an Informed Public." Journalism and Mass Communication 3(9), 2013. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Communication: Faculty Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. © David Publishing, 2013. Journalism and Mass Communication, ISSN 2160-6579 September 2013, Vol. 3, No. 9, 549-562 D DAVID PUBLISHING Taking the “Local” out of Local News: Implications for an Informed Public Lee Hood Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, USA The meaning of “local” in TV news is not as straightforward as one might imagine. “Local” newscasts in several U.S. markets are outsourced to an independent company located hundreds of miles from the communities served. What are the implications of such a delivery system for coverage of local issues and the Jeffersonian ideal of an informed citizenry? This study employs a content analysis of outsourced and local newscasts, using a data set of more than 1,000 stories from more than 30 hours of newscasts to determine if differences exist on story topics and source types.
    [Show full text]
  • Recognizing Women in the Church
    Recognizing Women in the Church Anne Henderson Author and Deputy Director Sydney Institute Address to the St. Thomas More Forum 7 September 2011 Thank you Bill, and the St Thomas More Forum, for the invitation to speak here tonight. Perhaps the first woman of faith I should be recognising tonight is journalist Angela Shanahan, who started this forum with a handful of others a few years back. As someone who has helped to run a Sydney forum – The Sydney Institute – for 23 years, I know how hard these activities are to maintain. So, well done. We probably all remember learning about the theological virtues at one time or another. The three great virtues – faith, hope and charity, or love as it is now more often called. We may also have been told that the greatest of these virtues is “love”. But today it’s not love per se I am going to focus on, but the first of the virtues – faith. And in many ways it is faith that leads to the other two. On a very material level, faith seems to be all around us these days with the coming of the carbon tax – a faith in the ranks of Labor that has possibly now moved more into the realms of “hope”– hope that imposition of a carbon tax in Australia will work out and that the government’s faith in its new policy direction will soon enough be accepted by a majority of Australians. We shall watch with interest at this exposition of one – if not two – of the great theological virtues.
    [Show full text]
  • Download and Otherwise Freely Deal with This Work for Any Purpose, Provided That You Attribute the Owner
    Annual Report 2007-2008 © State of New South Wales through the Administrative Decisions Tribunal, Attorney General’s Department 2008 Copyright: You may copy, distribute, display, download and otherwise freely deal with this work for any purpose, provided that you attribute the owner. However, you must obtain permission if you wish to (a) charge others for access to the work (other than at cost), (b) include the work in advertising or a product for sale, or (c) modify the work. Disclaimer: This document has been prepared by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal for general information purposes and while every care has been taken in relation to its accuracy, no warranty is given or implied. Further, recipients should obtain their own independent advice before making any decisions that rely on this information. Alternate formats: This information can be provided in alternative formats such as Braille, audiotape, large print or computer disk. Please contact Corporate Services or Diversity Services on (02) 9228 7507 (voice), (02) 9228 7733 (TTY - for people who are Deaf or have a speech impairment) or [email protected] The Hon. John Hatzistergos MLC Attorney General and Minister for Justice Parliament House SYDNEY NSW 2000 Dear Attorney, In accordance with section 26 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, I am pleased to present the tenth annual report of the Tribunal, covering the period 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008. Yours sincerely, Judge KEVIN O’CONNOR AM President 3 October 2008 Level 15, St James Centre, 111
    [Show full text]
  • MEDIA WATCH on Phillip Adams
    ISSUE 39 AUGUST 2011 ANYA POUKCHANSKI with a Gen Y look at The First Stone STEPHEN MATCHETT looks at political biography with Bush, Blair and Howard AYN RAND uncovered – again GERARD HENDERSON versus Brenda Niall – history and the case of Fr Hackett SJ JOHN MCCONNELL unveils Mark Aarons’ rethink on the Australian Communist Party Faith and politics – Enid Lyons as seen by ANNE HENDERSON SANDALISTA WATCH CONTINUES – Margaret Throsby and Haydn Keenan find ASIO under the bed MEDIA WATCH on Phillip Adams. Alan Ramsey and Robert Manne’s memories Published by The Sydney Institute 41 Phillip St. with Gerard Henderson’s Sydney 2000 Ph: (02) 9252 3366 MEDIA WATCH Fax: (02) 9252 3360 The Sydney Institute Quarterly Issue 39, August 2011 l CONTENTS MR SCOTT’S FIVE YEAR PLAN Editorial 2 In July 2006 Mark Scott commenced work as managing director of the Australian Broadcasting Sandalista Watch - Corporation. Initially appointed for a five year term, Mr Scott recently had his contract renewed for a Public Broadcasting, ASIO second term by the ABC Board. Shortly after his aand the Cold War appointment, Mark Scott’s office approached The Sydney Institute with a proposal that he deliver his - Gerard Henderson 3 first major public on the ABC to the Institute. The offer was willingly accepted and the talk took place Government and Freedom - on 16 October 2006. Who is Ayn Rand? In his address, Mark Scott correctly pointed out that i - 6 he was both managing director and editor-in-chief of Anne Henderson the public broadcaster. He acknowledged that there is “a sense that the organisation has issues with Ripples From the First Stone balance and fairness” and conceded that the ABC - Anya Poukchanski 10 had “been at times too defensive in the face of such criticism”.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear Ms Kleinig I Refer to Your Recent Phone Call to My Office And
    From: Gerard Henderson Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2013 4:33 PM To: Xanthe Kleinig Cc: Mark Scott; Richard Finlayson; Michael Millett Subject: RE: query from Media Watch Dear Ms Kleinig I refer to your recent phone call to my office and subsequent email to me (dated 9 May 2013) advising that the ABC 1 Media Watch program “is interested in the declarations or otherwise of expert commentators from institutes and think tanks who contribute frequently to the public conversation, especially in the media”. I watched the Media Watch credits last night. I noted that Media Watch presenter Jonathan Holmes has three journalists/researchers and four librarians in addition to a production team of around ten (not including studio/camera/editing crew). In view of Media Watch’s substantial research staff, I am surprised that you do not seem to be aware of the aims and practices of The Sydney Institute. The Sydney Institute is not a think tank. Rather, it is a policy forum for debate and discussion. The Sydney Institute has no policies, does no lobbying and does not advocate causes. Speakers at the Institute, over the past six months, include Senator Christine Milne, Anthony Albanese, Tony Abbott, Senator Bob Carr and Senator George Brandis. As you should be aware, speakers address the Institute for about 30 minutes and engage in questions/discussion for a further 30 minutes. All talks delivered are published in full (subject to only stylistic editing and/or the rare elimination of defamatory material) in The Sydney Papers Online and downloaded on the Institute’s podcast.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission on Senate Enquiry Into Media Diversity in Australia The
    Submission on Senate enquiry into media diversity in Australia The state of media diversity, independence and reliability in Australia and the impact that this has on public interest journalism and democracy. DATE: 6TH DECEMBER 2020 MY BACKGROUND I am a retired business professional who has worked in the information technology and information industry all my working life. My roles have included technical, management, account management, regional sales management and worldwide product marketing. I have taken an interest is current affairs all of my life and am very cognisant of the technical capabilities of the internet and social media. MY SUBMISSION The greatest change to the media landscape in Australia over recent years is the influence of the internet and online media and advertising and the commensurate fall in advertising revenue in the traditional masthead newspapers. The arrival of Google, Facebook, Twitter and other social media has changed the way users explore news, current affairs and other content of interest. The operational model of social media is to fund their business through advertising which extracts large sources of revenue from traditional media. This results in the need for commercial media to cut costs, change their business model, introduce paywalls requiring subscription to access media content, and merge into larger conglomerates. The other major media providers in Australia are the publicly funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and SBS. The internet and social media has not affected their funding source and has in fact increased their reach. The ABC receives over $1 Billion annually and is forever complaining about cuts, be they cuts in real terms or simply through a lack of inflation indexed cost increases.
    [Show full text]
  • First Century Fox Inc and Sky Plc; European Intervention Notice
    Rt Hon Karen Bradley Secretary of State for Digital Culture Media and Sport July 14 2017 Dear Secretary of State Twenty-First Century Fox Inc and Sky plc; European Intervention Notice The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting is responding to your request for new submissions on the test of commitment to broadcasting standards. We are pleased to submit this short supplement to the submission we provided for Ofcom in March. As requested, the information is up-to-date, but we are adding an appeal to you to reconsider Ofcom’s recommendation to accept the 21CF bid on this ground, which we find wholly unconvincing in the light of the evidence we submitted. SKY NEWS IN AUSTRALIA In a pre-echo of the current buyout bid in the UK, Sky News Australia, previously jointly- owned with other media owners, became wholly owned by the Murdochs on December 1 last year. When the CPBF made its submission on the Commitment to Broadcasting Standards EIN to Ofcom in March there were three months of operation by which to judge the direction of the channel, but now there are three months more. A number of commentaries have been published. The Murdoch entity that controls Sky Australia is News Corporation rather than 21FC but the service is clearly following the Fox formula about which the CPBF commented to Ofcom. Indeed it is taking the model of broadcasting high-octane right-wing political commentary in peak viewing times even further. While Fox News has three continuous hours of talk shows on weekday evenings, Sky News Australia has five.
    [Show full text]
  • Dirty Power: Burnt Country 1 Greenpeace Australia Pacific Greenpeace Australia Pacific
    How the fossil fuel industry, News Corp, and the Federal Government hijacked the Black Summer bushfires to prevent action on climate change Dirty Power: Burnt Country 1 Greenpeace Australia Pacific Greenpeace Australia Pacific Lead author Louis Brailsford Contributing authors Nikola Čašule Zachary Boren Tynan Hewes Edoardo Riario Sforza Design Olivia Louella Authorised by Kate Smolski, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Sydney May 2020 www.greenpeace.org.au TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive summary 4 1. Introduction 6 2. The Black Summer bushfires 7 3. Deny, minimise, adapt: The response of the Morrison Government 9 Denial 9 Minimisation 10 Adaptation and resilience 11 4. Why disinformation benefits the fossil fuel industry 12 Business as usual 13 Protecting the coal industry 14 5. The influence of the fossil fuel lobby on government 16 6. Political donations and financial influence 19 7. News Corp’s disinformation campaign 21 News Corp and climate denialism 21 News Corp, the Federal Government and the fossil fuel industry 27 8. #ArsonEmergency: social media disinformation and the role of News Corp and the Federal Government 29 The facts 29 #ArsonEmergency 30 Explaining the persistence of #ArsonEmergency 33 Timeline: #ArsonEmergency, News Corp and the Federal Government 36 9. Case study – “He’s been brainwashed”: Attacking the experts 39 10. Case study – Matt Kean, the Liberal party minister who stepped out of line 41 11. Conclusions 44 End Notes 45 References 51 Dirty Power: Burnt Country 3 Greenpeace Australia Pacific EXECUTIVE SUMMARY stronger action to phase out fossil fuels, was aided by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp media empire, and a Australia’s 2019/20 Black coordinated campaign of social media disinformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Papers on Parliament Lectures in the Senate Occasional Lecture Series, and Other Papers
    Papers on Parliament Lectures in the Senate Occasional Lecture Series, and other papers Number 58 August 2012 Published and printed by the Department of the Senate Parliament House, Canberra ISSN 1031–976X Published by the Department of the Senate, 2012 ISSN 1031–976X Papers on Parliament is edited and managed by the Research Section, Department of the Senate. Edited by Paula Waring All editorial inquiries should be made to: Assistant Director of Research Research Section Department of the Senate PO Box 6100 Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Telephone: (02) 6277 3164 Email: [email protected] To order copies of Papers on Parliament On publication, new issues of Papers on Parliament are sent free of charge to subscribers on our mailing list. If you wish to be included on that mailing list, please contact the Research Section of the Department of the Senate at: Telephone: (02) 6277 3074 Email: [email protected] Printed copies of previous issues of Papers on Parliament may be provided on request if they are available. Past issues are available online at www.aph.gov.au/senate/pops. Contents Joseph Lyons—Australia’s Depression Prime Minister 1 Anne Henderson Minority Report: Lessons from Canada’s Minority Parliaments 17 Andrew Banfield The Strange Case of Privileges and Immunities 39 William Buss Forecasting Presidential Elections: Obama, Romney, or What? 53 Kenneth Mayer Media Reporting of the Next Federal Election: What Can We Expect? 73 Sally Young ‘This Is a Procedure on Which We Should Not Lightly Embark’: Orders for the Production of Documents in the Australian Senate, 1901 to 1988 89 Paula Waring iii Contributors Anne Henderson is an author and editor and Deputy Director of the Sydney Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Gets to Tell Australian Stories?
    Who Gets To Tell Australian Stories? Putting the spotlight on cultural and linguistic diversity in television news and current affairs The Who Gets To Tell Australian Stories? report was prepared on the basis of research and support from the following people: Professor James Arvanitakis (Western Sydney University) Carolyn Cage (Deakin University) Associate Professor Dimitria Groutsis (University of Sydney) Dr Annika Kaabel (University of Sydney) Christine Han (University of Sydney) Dr Ann Hine (Macquarie University) Nic Hopkins (Google News Lab) Antoinette Lattouf (Media Diversity Australia) Irene Jay Liu (Google News Lab) Isabel Lo (Media Diversity Australia) Professor Catharine Lumby (Macquarie University) Dr Usha Rodrigues (Deakin University) Professor Tim Soutphommasane (University of Sydney) Subodhanie Umesha Weerakkody (Deakin University) This report was researched, written and designed on Aboriginal land. Sovereignty over this land was never ceded. We wish to pay our respect to elders past, present and future, and acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities’ ongoing struggles for justice and self-determination. Who Gets to Tell Australian Stories? Executive summary The Who Gets To Tell Australian Stories? report is the first comprehensive picture of who tells, frames and produces stories in Australian television news and current affairs. It details the experience and the extent of inclusion and representation of culturally diverse news and current affairs presenters, commentators and reporters. It is also the first
    [Show full text]
  • Recognition for Two Doyens of Intellectual Leadership
    Media Release 07/10/20 Recognition for two doyens of intellectual leadership Gerard and Anne Henderson have been recognised with honorary doctorates from Australian Catholic University (ACU) for their influence on how Australian history and contemporary public policy issues are understood and debated. The award, presented by ACU Vice-Chancellor Professor Greg Craven AO GSGC, in a small ceremony in Sydney on Tuesday 6 October 2020, honours the Hendersons’ contribution to Australian history, public affairs and civil discourse. The Hendersons’ establishment and work with The Sydney Institute, and their involvement in public debate through other media outlets, has allowed Australians to understand some of the great people who have shaped our story and their legacy. Born and educated in Melbourne, Dr Gerard Henderson began his academic career with a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Laws at the University of Melbourne, and a Doctor of Philosophy from La Trobe University, where he subsequently worked in the Politics Department and the Department of Political Science, then as a teacher and scholar at the University of Tasmania. Outside of academia, Dr Henderson’s career has seen him work extensively in politics and governance. He held the position of private secretary to the Hon. Kevin Newman and later was senior private secretary to the Hon. John Howard MP. Dr Henderson has also served with the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Industrial Relations. His political activities have involved participation in the Australia 2020 Summit in 2008 and the Australian History Summit in 2006. Also a Melbourne native, Anne Henderson has long played a role in the education of young Australians and refugees.
    [Show full text]