ON
← Back to feed
Liberal MP Andrew Hastie takes stand in WAtoday defamation trial
Australia🏛️ PoliticsCenteryesterday

Liberal MP Andrew Hastie takes stand in WAtoday defamation trial

Federal Liberal MP Andrew Hastie is testifying in a defamation trial brought by Perth property developer Greg Poland, who alleges that Hastie and others distributed a covert recording used in articles published by WAtoday in 2019. The articles claimed Poland sought to illegally dispose of toxic soil linked to a government project. The recording, obtained by sand miner Aaron Grainger, includes Poland discussing potential dealings with Transport Minister Rita Saffioti. Poland claims the articles falsely accused him of corruption and improper influence-peddling. Hastie denies wrongdoing, stating he shared the recording with a former journalist but insists he did not promise to keep it confidential. The case involves legal disputes over journalistic ethics, transparency, and the handling of sensitive information.

A Perth-based property developer has launched a defamation lawsuit against Federal Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, two of his staff members, former WA Liberal leader Zak Kirkup, and two former journalists from the now-defunct newspaper group Fairfax, alleging they conspired to distribute a covertly recorded conversation implicating him in unethical dealings with the Western Australian government. The legal battle centers around a 46-minute recording of a 2019 meeting between Greg Poland, the plaintiff, and sand miner Aaron Grainger at the Subiaco Hotel in Perth. The recording, obtained without Poland’s knowledge, reportedly features Poland discussing plans to dispose of toxic soil from the Perth Airport Rail Tunnel project at a site near the city, potentially involving a land swap with the government. The content of the recording formed the basis of two articles published in 2019 by WAtoday, a publication formerly owned by Fairfax Media, which has since been acquired by Nine Entertainment Co. Poland alleges that the articles falsely implied he engaged in corrupt practices, including facilitating secret deals between the state government and private interests without proper oversight. He denies these allegations and is seeking damages from Hastie, Kirkup, and the journalists involved, claiming they conspired to disseminate the recording without his consent. During the trial, which took place in the Supreme Court of Western Australia, Hastie testified that he received the recording from Grainger via email and subsequently shared it with former WAtoday journalist Nathan Hondros through WhatsApp. According to Hastie, he believed the information was relevant to public interest, particularly concerning concerns about the potential misuse of the Peel region as a dumping ground for industrial waste. Grainger, who provided the recording, stated he had initially recorded the meeting thinking he was being set up by Poland. He claimed that Hastie assured him the recording would remain confidential and not be shared with others. However, Grainger later confirmed that the recording was used in the articles published by WAtoday, leading to the current legal dispute. Hastie denied any wrongdoing in sharing the recording with Hondros, stating that he could not confirm whether he had also shared it with Kirkup, who was then a local Liberal MP and later became the leader of the WA Liberal Party. He admitted that he might have shared the recording with Kirkup but insisted that his actions were motivated by a desire to inform the public about potential environmental risks associated with the proposed disposal plan. The case has drawn attention to broader issues surrounding the handling of sensitive information and the responsibilities of public officials in ensuring transparency and accountability. While the trial continues, the focus remains on establishing whether the distribution of the recording was done with malice or in the public interest. The proceedings have highlighted the complex interplay between media ethics, political accountability, and individual privacy rights. As the trial progresses, further testimony and evidence are expected to shed light on the circumstances surrounding the recording's dissemination and the motivations behind the parties' actions.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

1 reports

ABC News (Australia) logoABC News (Australia)State / PublicCenterFactual 85Objective 75yesterday
Liberal MP Andrew Hastie takes stand in WAtoday defamation trial

Federal Liberal MP Andrew Hastie is testifying in a defamation trial brought by Perth property developer Greg Poland, who alleges that Hastie and others distributed a covert recording used in articles published by WAtoday in 2019. The articles claimed Poland sought to illegally dispose of toxic soil linked to a government project. The recording, obtained by sand miner Aaron Grainger, includes Poland discussing potential dealings with Transport Minister Rita Saffioti. Poland claims the articles falsely accused him of corruption and improper influence-peddling. Hastie denies wrongdoing, stating he shared the recording with a former journalist but insists he did not promise to keep it confidential. The case involves legal disputes over journalistic ethics, transparency, and the handling of sensitive information.

Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the dispute—Poland's allegations of corruption and Hastie's denial of wrongdoing—without overtly favoring either side. While the subject involves high-profile politicians and legal proceedings, the framing remains balanced, focusing on the facts of the case rather

Why factuality (85): The article provides detailed information about the defamation trial involving Andrew Hastie and Greg Poland, including the context of the covert recording and the allegations made against Poland. It references specific details from the recording, such as Poland's comments about Rita Saffioti and th

Why objectivity (75): The article presents the facts in a straightforward manner but uses emotionally charged language such as 'covertly recorded meeting' and 'political headache,' which may imply judgment about the situation. While it reports the legal actions and allegations objectively, there is a slight tilt towards

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories