A Senate committee has rejected deputy secretary Celia Perkins’ proposal to discourage social media sharing of public servants’ evidence, with emails obtained under freedom of information showing the plan to cite bullying and security concerns was backed by the department’s secretary.
Deputy secretary Celia Perkins made the statement at the committee hearing on 4 September, saying defence witnesses "do not consent to the reposting of our evidence to social media sites". The Greens senator David Shoebridge objected: "This is evidence given in an open public hearing … These witnesses do not get to censor what the Australian public sees."
Perkins pointed to a submission from the secretaries board of the Australian Public Service that raised similar concerns about evidence being taken out of context, and alleged that "edited and embellished" videos from previous hearings had generated "significant highly inappropriate and highly personal commentary that was distressing for staff and invited ridicule, hostility and abuse".
Emails obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information show the plan was flagged with the offices of deputy prime minister Richard Marles and assistant defence minister Peter Khalil, and received the backing of department secretary Meghan Quinn. Two days before the hearing, Perkins told two fellow deputy secretaries: "Meghan is fully supportive, as is [Khalil]." In a 25 August email, Perkins wrote to Quinn that officials could be put in danger if their evidence before public committees was published online, outlining "core arguments" including that posts "designed to invite outraged responses" increase "the personal risk from malign online actors, including cyber and foreign intelligence threats". Quinn replied: "Very happy to support you using such words."
Perkins' colleagues John Reid and Cath Patterson endorsed the proposed wording, with Patterson calling it "polite and clear and safe" and Reid agreeing it was "a good statement". Reid suggested minor changes, and that version was read at the committee. The offices of Marles and Khalil did not provide an on-record response, but Guardian Australia understands neither office directed Perkins on the content of her statement. Defence did not supply a response to Guardian Australia, but a spokesperson pointed to Quinn's opening statement to a Senate estimates committee on Thursday, in which she supported the secretaries board submission and said the treatment of staff after committee hearings could sometimes conflict with an employer's duty to ensure the health and safety of employees.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The episode tests whether witnesses can control how evidence given in open parliamentary hearings is shared, and who decides what the public sees.
- It shows senior officials weighing staff welfare and security risks against transparency when preparing statements to parliament.
- The FOI release exposes how the department's leadership coordinated its message before the hearing.
Background
The request was made at a parliamentary inquiry hearing on 4 September, where Perkins said witnesses did not consent to reposting of evidence. She pointed to a submission from the secretaries board of the Australian Public Service that raised concerns about evidence being taken out of context. The committee rejected the request on the advice of the Senate clerk. Defence secretary Meghan Quinn later supported the secretaries board submission, saying the treatment of staff after hearings could conflict with an employer's duty to ensure the health and safety of employees.
Key Perspectives
Celia Perkins (defence deputy secretary): argued that defence witnesses "do not consent to the reposting of our evidence to social media sites", citing the risk of online bullying and national security threats.
David Shoebridge (Greens senator): objected that evidence given in an open public hearing should not be censored by witnesses, saying "These witnesses do not get to censor what the Australian public sees."
Meghan Quinn (defence secretary): said she was "very happy to support" the proposed wording, and later backed the secretaries board submission, noting staff treatment after hearings could conflict with an employer's duty of care.
Offices of Richard Marles and Peter Khalil: did not provide an on-record response, but Guardian Australia understands neither office directed Perkins on the content of her statement.
What to Watch
- Whether the FOI release prompts further questioning of the defence department or the ministers involved.
- Whether the Senate committee or clerk issues any new guidance on sharing or reposting of hearing evidence.
- Whether Perkins' statement or Quinn's support is raised at future estimates hearings.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedAt the 4 September hearing, Celia Perkins said defence witnesses “do not consent to the reposting of our evidence to social media sites”.World news | The Guardian: “her 4 September statement to a committee hearing, where she said defence witnesses “do not consent to the reposting of our evidence to social media sites””
- SupportedDavid Shoebridge objected: “This is evidence given in an open public hearing … These witnesses do not get to censor what the Australian public sees.”World news | The Guardian: “The Greens senator David Shoebridge instantly objected, saying: “This is evidence given in an open public hearing … These witnesses do not get to censor what the Australian public sees.””
- SupportedPerkins alleged that “edited and embellished” videos from previous hearings had generated highly inappropriate, personal commentary that distressed staff and invited abuse.World news | The Guardian: “She pointed to a submission from the secretaries board of the Australian Public Service, which had raised similar concerns about evidence being taken out of context, and alleged “edited and embellished” videos from previous hearings had “generated significant highly inappropriate and highly personal commentary that was distressing for staff and invited ridicule, hostility and abuse”.”
- SupportedTwo days before the hearing, Perkins told two fellow deputy secretaries: “Meghan is fully supportive, as is [Khalil].”World news | The Guardian: ““Meghan is fully supportive, as is [Khalil]. I discussed today in a meeting with [Khalil] and staff from [Marles] and his office,” Perkins told two fellow deputy secretaries two days before the hearing.”
- SupportedIn a 25 August email, Perkins said posts designed to invite outraged responses increased personal risks from malign online actors, including cyber and foreign intelligence threats.World news | The Guardian: ““And these post[s], designed to invite outraged responses – increase the personal risk from malign online actors, including cyber and foreign intelligence threats.””
- SupportedQuinn replied to Perkins: “Very happy to support you using such words.”World news | The Guardian: “In response, Quinn wrote: “Very happy to support you using such words.””
- SupportedPatterson called the proposed words “polite and clear and safe”.World news | The Guardian: “Patterson responded to Perkins’ email: “Those words look fine – polite and clear and safe given in the Sec Board submission”.”
- SupportedReid agreed it was “a good statement”.World news | The Guardian: “Reid concurred: “I agree with Cath; this is a good statement and makes the point clearly and respectfully.””
- SupportedThe defence department secretary backed a push to stop social media sharing of hearing evidence, as the headline says.World news | The Guardian: “The secretary of the defence department approved a senior official’s controversial idea to tell a Senate hearing that footage of public servants giving evidence should not be shared on social media because it could invite online bullying and raise national security concerns.”
- SupportedThe Senate committee rejected Perkins’ request.World news | The Guardian: “The committee rejected Perkins’ request on the advice of the Senate clerk.”
- SupportedPerkins’ proposal cited online bullying and national security risks.World news | The Guardian: “The secretary of the defence department approved a senior official’s controversial idea to tell a Senate hearing that footage of public servants giving evidence should not be shared on social media because it could invite online bullying and raise national security concerns.”
- SupportedEmails obtained under freedom of information showed the plan was flagged with the Marles and Khalil offices and backed by secretary Meghan Quinn.World news | The Guardian: “Emails obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information reveal deputy secretary Celia Perkins’ planned request to the parliamentary inquiry was flagged with the offices of deputy prime minister Richard Marles and assistant defence minister Peter Khalil, and received the backing of department secretary Meghan Quinn.”