The ABC suited Whateley. Its audience appreciated his cerebral style, journalistic know-how, and broadcasting skill. That he's going to a local radio station, which in more than a decade still hasn't achieved consistent critical mass of audience, makes this an even more daring move.

A hidden loss for him is that he has been working in an environment in which he would have received regular feedback from those to whom he broadcast. Most of this would've been affirming, although the owners of the ABC - the people - are also inclined to let broadcasters know when they disagree with them. Nevertheless, criticism is better than no response it all as it underlines that people care.

Beyond all this, the ABC has arguably given Whateley more rope to expand his career than it has given any employee in the organisation's history. For he has, over a number of years now, been permitted to work four winter nights a week on pay television as host of AFL 360.

As a one-time ABC sports' broadcaster myself, who at different times sought permission to do 'outside' work, I've watched this with interest. The performance of such extra-curricular can be a complicated and vexed issue at the ABC.

When, late in my time with the national broadcaster, I sought permission to do Friday night football with Channel Nine, I was initially knocked back. Then, seeking not to lose an experienced contributor to its sporting output, the ABC buckled and allowed me to negotiate.

I recall, during that time, taking a call from a long-retired ABC man whom I'd never met. He told me in no uncertain terms that trying to have it both ways was wrong. If I wanted to earn commercial dollars, I should relinquish my job. If I wanted to stay with Auntie, I should withdraw from any negotiation with a commercial broadcaster.

But I'd already negotiated a contract, one designed to protect me from foreseeable controversy and conflict. And calling Magpie games with Eddie McGuire was foreseeable controversy. Thus, there unfolded an unfortunate spat.

With hindsight, the old ABC man was right. As an ABC broadcaster, your salary is paid by the taxpayer and the many who care about independent broadcasting are entitled to expect genuine independence.

The problem, though, is money. A few years before all that, I had lunch one day - a sandwich - with another AFL club president and somehow the matter of how much I earnt came up. When I told him, his words were a sad: 'Tim, Tim, Tim???'

As an ABC broadcaster I was, in industry terms, a modest earner.

In the years that followed, the gap between standard ABC rates and market rates for sports broadcasters - particularly on television - grew rapidly. By the time I left the ABC, 15 years ago, I'd formed the view that the national broadcaster simply had to find a way of paying its key broadcasters significantly better than had traditionally been the case. Otherwise, most would inevitably be lost to the ABC. There is a limit to the idealism of all but the most dedicated employee when they know they're paid vastly below what the commercial market offers.

And, over the next few years, this happened. Of course, some news organisations treated it as a scandal and, indeed, a few years back The Australian newspaper gained access to a list of the ABC's biggest earners. A so-called Rich List. Much hay was made and, since then, elements of the national parliament hostile to the ABC have sought to legislate to make ABC salaries a matter of public knowledge.

Regardless of the selectivity and injustice of this, there is an aspect of it relevant to the Gerard Whateley story. For Whateley's name featured on the Rich List accessed by The Australian.

I sympathise with him over the invasion of his privacy. I also have no problem with the money he was being paid. It is precisely what I felt should happen in the case of significant ABC broadcasters and he had clearly become one of those.

There is a problem, though, with the ABC paying a significant loading to particular broadcasters, then allowing them to earn commercial dollars as well. For the loading these broadcasters receive is, surely, to reward them for their preparedness to remain not just with the ABC, but to remain as independent broadcasters and/or journalists.

It's hard to understand how ABC management could turn a blind eye to this. For it actually defeats the purpose for which the higher payments were designed.

You might ask whether this matters in the coverage of sport. Have no doubt it does. Modern sport is business and the potential for conflict of interest is great.

Whether it be in the matter of direct relationships with commercial organisations, whether it be in providing appropriate objective commentary on issues like television rights or the behaviour of commercial sponsors, or whether it be in the maintenance of suitably arm's-length relationships with sports administrators, an ABC employee has a responsibility to preserve his/her independence.

Whether or not this played any part in Gerard Whateley's motivation in leaving the national broadcaster, he has made a decision that is right for the ABC. No doubt it will be initially debilitating for the sports department to lose its star performer, yet this might be a case in which the area of sport - often overlooked amid the ABC's myriad priorities - shines a light on an important issue.