ABC says Porter tried to settle twice before mediation, case cost broadcaster $780,000

Christian Porter twice attempted to settle his defamation case against the ABC, but the eventual agreement cost the public broadcaster handsomely.

Christian Porter twice attempted to settle his defamation case against the ABC before mediation, but the matter ended up costing the public broadcaster $780,000, its managing director says.

The former attorney-general launched the case over a February article by Walkley-winning journalist Louise Milligan revealing a senior cabinet minister, later revealed to be Mr Porter, had been accused of an historical rape.

The ABC did not accept the article accused Mr Porter of being guilty, but it did express regret that some readers interpreted it as such.

Mr Porter, who denied the accusation, discontinued the case in May claiming the settlement was a “humiliation” for the ABC.

Appearing before senate estimates on Monday, managing director David Anderson said the broadcaster stood by the article, which remained online.

“On behalf of the ABC, I’m not humiliated and we do not regret the article,” he said.

RELATED: Calls grow for Porter probe after minister drops defamation suit

Christian Porter twice attempted to settle his defamation case against the ABC before mediation, the broadcaster says. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Adam Yip

Mr Anderson revealed the ABC rejected two settlement offers from Mr Porter, one before and one after he had seen the ABC’s defence.

He did not disclose what Mr Porter sought in either offer, but said the eventual agreement minimised the ABC’s costs.

“Had we gone through to trial, it would have been extensive cost; it would have been a long trial. If the two parties could find terms they could agree on, it was worth pursuing,” he said.

The broadcaster spent $680,000 defending the action, as well as paying $100,000 to the company of Mr Porter’s high-profile defamation lawyer Rebekah Giles, including “mediation and related” costs.

Mr Anderson revealed the cost of mediation was split between the two parties, but said the settlement had saved the broadcaster a substantial figure.

“If it was to be a three-week trial, we think that could have been another $1m to $1.5m in costs to the ABC,” he said.

The ABC has insisted no money was paid directly to Mr Porter, but Liberal senator Ben Small pressed Mr Anderson on where the remainder of the $100,000 paid to Ms Giles’ company had gone.

“Would you accept that that is in some way slightly disingenuous, because the ABC is remitting the money to (Ms Giles’ company) for the benefit of Mr Porter?” he said.

“For people watching on TV, I think we all understand where the money’s going.”

ABC managing director revealed the Porter case had cost the broadcaster $780,000, including mediation costs. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Gary Ramage

“It’s clear that we are paying Mr Porter’s lawyers for their time relating to the mediation, as well as the mediator,” Mr Anderson responded.

He reiterated the editor’s note since placed on the article referred to a “misinterpretation” from some readers that the article was an allegation of guilt against Mr Porter.

“That was not the intention of the article. That was not said in the article,” he said.

Liberal senator Jane Hume said she did not believe Mr Porter would be required to disclose whether a third-party paid for his legal fees to parliament, but said the former attorney-general used no commonwealth funds in his defence.

Four Corners executive producer Sally Neighbour deleted a tweet claiming “no money was paid” in the hours after Mr Porter dropped his case, later clarifying no money was paid to the former attorney-general.

Mr Anderson revealed he contacted ABC news director Gaven Morris to ensure Ms Neighbour’s tweet was corrected.

Ms Neighbour did not know what was in the deed of settlement, and likely made an error while reporting what was in the ABC’s publicly available statement, Mr Anderson said.

Mr Anderson also defended the ABC’s social media policy, saying the broadcaster ‘is not responsible for what they publish’ on their personal accounts but could impose a range of sanctions.

“So an ABC employee can tweet false things about a settlement the ABC has entered into, and as long as they deleted it, there are no consequences?” Liberal senator James Paterson asked.

“I don’t believe that was maliciously done; I don’t believe that was the intention. The tweet was deleted,” Mr Anderson replied.

ABC in-house lawyer Sebastian Maury resigned in May after labelling the Morrison government “fascist” on Twitter.

Liberal senator Henderson demanded to know why Mr Maury had been afforded the opportunity to resign, rather than facing immediate termination.

Mr Anderson said workplace relations law meant he was required to go through a process that “otherwise was leading” to the lawyer’s termination.

“It’s hard to terminate someone who’s resigned,” Mr Anderson said.

Ms Henderson pressed Mr Anderson on whether a line had been “blurred” between ABC employees’ personal accounts and official ABC accounts.

Mr Anderson said the ABC did not vet employees’ personal accounts, but could impose a range of sanctions for violations of its social media code, including termination.

“When someone has a personal social media account, the ABC is not responsible for what they publish,” he said.

“However, we will take action if it’s in breach of the code.”