Whistleblowing

[fatprop]

I am trying to get my head around what is and what is not whistleblowing

What kicked it off was a comment from Julian Burnside

"We pretend to protect whistle blowers, but look what they are doing to Freya Newman pic.twitter.com/IWU1javLSV#SaveFreya"

(the women who used her employment at a private company to find out about Abbotts daughter and her scholarship)

http://www.news.com.au/national/stu...to-face-sentence/story-fncynjr2-1227099542059

So I looked at the ASIC desription
"You must have reasonable grounds to suspect that the information you are disclosing indicates that the company or company officer may have breached the Corporations Act or the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001(ASIC Act)."

I Just don't see this as whistleblowing, am I wrong?

 

[Braveheart81]

Yeah, it is tricky and I think the fact that the whistleblowing we're talking about relates to a private company is why she's guilty.

It seems that if she was a public servant she'd have protection under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 but she's not.

Clearly the disclosure was in the public interest but it was disclosed from a private company so she doesn't get the same protections if it was from a government agency.

I think she'll get a pretty lenient sentence with no jail time.

 

[It is what it is]

Agree about some leniency.
Yes there was embarrassment, but no one lost an eye here.
Every day we witness offences where people aren't incarcerated.
Jail term would be embarrassing and draw parallels with Chinese justice.

 

[fatprop]

So you guys think there was a public interest component?

I am not sure.

 

[I like to watch]

Yeah, I think there was.
The context was the Principal of the organisation had just successfully publicly lobbied him for Government approvals that appeared not to be proceeding, or at the very least stalled for a considerable period.

So when the PM is using his clout to give individuals/organisations Government approvals they are seeking,it is relevant if his immediate family are recipients of substantial benefits.
Especially when these benefits have not ever been given to any other individual,despite claims to the contrary.

 

[Runner]

Julian Burnside has a very clear political agenda. As a lawyer he knows it was a breach but is using that for another end.

I am sure he would be very upset if a person in a private company doing his tax returns released that information because he is a public figure.

 

[Ruggo]

I am trying to get my head around what is and what is not whistleblowing

What kicked it off was a comment from Julian Burnside

"We pretend to protect whistle blowers, but look what they are doing to Freya Newman pic.twitter.com/IWU1javLSV#SaveFreya"

(the women who used her employment at a private company to find out about Abbotts daughter and her scholarship)

http://www.news.com.au/national/stu...to-face-sentence/story-fncynjr2-1227099542059

So I looked at the ASIC desription
"You must have reasonable grounds to suspect that the information you are disclosing indicates that the company or company officer may have breached the Corporations Act or the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001(ASIC Act)."

I Just don't see this as whistleblowing, am I wrong?

Seem to come down to a moral vs legal stand point this one. Awkward this one because I'm happy that the deal was expose yet at the same time I don't advocate the ends justifying the means.