Are you two sphincters done? The FAAA source would have had to been informed by the reporter seeking comment, and the reporter would have been directed there by the original source, knowing that a juicy third party quote was in the offing.
There is no way that the original facts could be leaked by anyone other than the original compiler of said facts. Which is, contrary to all documented policy, someone in Qantas. Someone who needs a close encounter with Centrelink.
This kind of thing just invites a comparative retributive project. Say, a compilation of management rorts, boondoggles, failures and misrepresentations charted against the known renumeration of the perpetrators. What fun! Lets see whose fraud/looting is the greater sin.
Want a witch hunt? Fine. Let's have a witch hunt. The kindling is over there, and the line for the dunking chair forms to the right. Do I smell smoke?
Disclaimer: if these people are in breach of whatever rules apply (and its hard to keep count these days, what with the trough of riches being slurped by our current crop of fin-de-siecle custom-suited executive looters)*, they deserve their fates. The same as those who deliver negative value for eye-popping renumeration deserve their eventual reckoning. (I wish that I was not an atheist)
*call that hyperbole? This is hyperbole!