Peta Credlin: Why Brittany Higgins’ $2.445m payout needs a closer look
The failure of the federal government to test claims that had been hotly disputed in court before hastily awarding Brittany Higgins $2.445m is little short of bizarre, writes Peta Credlin.
Peta Credlin
Don't miss out on the headlines from Peta Credlin. Followed categories will be added to My News.
We may never know what really happened in Senator Linda Reynold’s office on the fateful night in 2019 when Brittany Higgins claims that Bruce Lehrmann raped her.
But what we do know is that once her claims were made public in early 2021, Anthony Albanese and his then-opposition frontbenchers weaponised them for months against the Morrison government.
And what’s now been confirmed in court, thanks to Lehrmann’s defamation action, is that the Albanese government agreed to pay her $2.445 million with almost indecent haste.
Whatever your views about this case, the obvious question is whether this payment was more a political reward than a legitimate legal settlement and a proper use of taxpayer money.
Prior to the rape allegation breaking in February 2021, Higgins and her boyfriend held extensive discussions with journalists about how her claims could be used to damage the Morrison government.
One of Higgins’ text messages at the time reportedly said of the then-PM: “He’s about to be f..ked over. Just wait. We’ve got him”.
As well, her boyfriend was reportedly in frequent contact with Labor staffers and ministers prior to, and during their use of the allegations, to claim that the Morrison government had created a toxic culture that was hostile to women.
After the court case against her alleged assailant was dropped, the former staffer then brought legal action against her former ministerial employers on the grounds that they had failed in their duty of care towards her and failed to provide a safe place of work.
The case was settled late last year after a single day’s mediation at which neither Reynolds, nor Higgins’ other employer, Senator Michaelia Cash, gave evidence.
Indeed, both former Liberal ministers were told by the Albanese government that coverage of their legal costs would be withdrawn if they presented their side of the story.
Not only is the size and the speed of the settlement unprecedented, but the failure to test claims that had previously been hotly disputed in court is, simply, little short of bizarre.
As we now know from court documents released last week, the settlement agreed between Higgins and the government included $400,000 for “hurt, humiliation and distress”, $220,000 for medical and other expenses, $100,000 for past and future domestic assistance, $245,000 for legal costs, and $1.48 million (or almost 20 times her then-staffer’s salary of $78,000 a year) as a capital payment for loss of earning capacity, presumably on the basis of her lawyers’ argument that she had “been diagnosed as medically unfit for any form of employment and has been given a very poor prognosis for future employment”.
Even though, since leaving her government employment, Higgins has reportedly worked as a visiting fellow at the ANU, interned at a UN convention overseas, and been paid an advance to write her story.
So here’s the nub of it: A Morrison government staffer is accused of rape in the ministerial wing; this creates a firestorm about the Coalition’s alleged “women problem”; the government duly changes and the accuser gets almost $2.5 million as a payout thanks to the ministers (or their officials) who were exploiting this accusation while in opposition.
Without a comprehensive explanation from the government, the public conclusion will be: “This stinks”.
I have inside knowledge of staffing issues, including legal settlements having worked for three opposition leaders and a PM.
If Higgins’ story is substantially true, and if she has indeed suffered the damage that her lawyers claimed, even if merited, the process for her payout is like nothing I have ever seen, and the $2.445m paid to her has got to be a record.
The real question here is less the truth of her claims and the consequences for her, but the conduct of the government in agreeing to such a payout without any investigation and in the absence of any court finding.
Normally, claims of this nature are thoroughly investigated and certainly not settled simply on the say-so of the claimant.
Understandably, Linda Reynolds has referred this matter to the newly created federal integrity commission. And, if this body is worth anything, the case of the Higgins payout will already be under investigation.
Watch Peta on Credlin on Sky News, weeknights at 6pm
Originally published as Peta Credlin: Why Brittany Higgins’ $2.445m payout needs a closer look
Credlin: Payman saga wiped out goodwill over cost-of-living relief
The start of power bill relief and tax cuts should have marked a rare good news week for the Albanese government. Instead it was hijacked by a turncoat senator who should have been disciplined by the PM weeks ago, writes Peta Credlin.
Credlin: Is Albanese’s appalling week the start of the end?
The Prime Minister looked weak and out of touch last week, writes Peta Credlin: failing to discipline Senator Fatima Payman, lionising Julian Assange, and giving the Governor-General a $220k pay rise during a cost of living crisis.