Amid Brittany Higgins’ rape claims, Minister reaches for the old playbook

Senator Linda Reynolds wipes a tear during Question Time in the Senate on Thursday. Picture: Getty

The allegations made by Brittany Higgins aired throughout the week don’t amount to a scandal.

I mean, they’re scandalous. Outrageous, abhorrent, but it is not a political scandal per se.

The political environment in which these allegations are made make the who-knew-what-and-when a media fixation. To a very large degree the reporting of the wash up is vitally important.

We should not forget that what Brittany Higgins alleges amounts to a crime with a 12-year maximum jail sentence in the ACT. That the alleged offence may have occurred in the office of a Minister of the Crown merely adds to the fixation. As it should, because there are enough holes in the various accounts provided by our most senior political figures to drive a Leopard tank through.

But what we do know at this point is enough to make judgments on the political class in this country and its extraordinary hypocrisy.

The National Australia Day Council announced Grace Tame as the Australian of the Year on January 25. It was an inspired choice, made outside party politics, an award given for Ms Tame’s courage in leading a successful campaign which ultimately led to the Tasmanian parliament legislating to revoke an awful law that kept victims of sexual abuse silent. But it is more than that. Ms Tame stands as an example, a force for all victims of sexual abuse to speak out and be heard.

Brittany Higgins on the campaign trail with Scott Morrison after her alleged attack. Picture: Supplied.

It was the sight of the Prime Minister standing next to Grace Tame that led to Ms Higgins to come forward with her own story. In turn, the advocate for survivors of sexual assault, especially within an institutional setting, urged Australians to listen to Ms Higgins’ story.

“This case is another reminder for us all of the need for survivor voices to raise awareness and improve our collective understanding of sexual abuse,” Ms Tame wrote on social media.

Most Australians appreciate the courage Ms Higgins has shown. Understanding her allegations and the consequences of her coming forward is a much tougher exercise.

We endured a Royal Commission. Five years elapsed between the announcement of the Royal Commission into Institutionalised Responses to Child Sexual Assault and its final report in December 2017.

And when it did, parliamentarians from the Prime Minister down offered their apologies. They weren’t personally responsible for the crimes of institutional sexual assaults on children, but as they represented the political leadership of this country, they apologised for the crimes committed against children, crimes that threw victims into a lifetime of turmoil, trauma and often enforced silence.

Fine speeches were made, tears were shed, politicians embraced survivors and told them their stories of abuse were believed. But the lessons appear to have gone unlearnt.

What that Royal Commission found almost invariably was that when people in authority in institutions became aware of credible evidence of sexual assault, those leaders instinctively, almost in Pavlovian fashion, chose to protect the reputation of the institution over the rights of victims. They often chose to ignore the plight of victims. They often chose to disbelieve them. They often persuaded victims not to go to police. They covered up, sometimes destroying evidence, knowing that in doing so they were committing crimes. All in the name of preserving the blessed name of the institution.

It was disgraceful behaviour from people who purported to be community leaders, senior religious figures, school principals, people held in high trust.

It is an offence to fail to report credible evidence of child sexual assault. It was before the Royal Commission commenced its investigations and remains so now, albeit tepidly revised. But these laws are as soft as butter accompanied with slap-on-the-wrist punishments across the states and territories — and in the case of New South Wales for a long period, no penalty at all.

Suffice to say, there have been no convictions of this type recorded in living memory.

The difference in the alleged Higgins case is that an adult has made the accusations and it is incumbent upon that person to make a formal complaint to police, which in turn initiates a criminal investigation.

As reported by Samantha Maiden, on news.com.au on Tuesday, Ms Higgins was called into a meeting with Minister Reynolds and her Chief of Staff and at some point in that meeting, she was told by the Minister, “If you choose to go to the police we will support you in that process, but we just need to know ahead of time. We need to know now.”

The context is important. That meeting took place some two weeks before the Prime Minister called the 2019 election.

Perhaps Ms Higgins was paraphrasing, but if words of that nature were imparted by Minister Reynolds to her, the Minister should resign without qualification. She should have packed her bags days ago. But if those words or a form of them were used by the Minister, she is done. She can battle on as Defence Minister. In the current political environment, ministerial standards are such that almost everyone gets a pass. If Minister Reynolds used those words or conveyed that message to Ms Higgins, they stand as a stain on Ms Reynolds’ character and political life that cannot be removed.

A statement issued on behalf of the now Defence Minister three days ago offers vague words and implied good intentions.

“The Minister encouraged the staff member to speak with the police in order to assess the options available to them. At this meeting, the staff member indicated they would like to speak to the Australian Federal Police, which the Minister supported, and the office facilitated.

“After the incident, the Prime Minister’s office provided support to the Minister and her office in assessing the breach of the Statement of Standards for Ministerial Staff.

“Subsequently, the Minister was informed that a complaint had been made to the AFP. The Minister and her office continued to provide support to the staff member through this period.”

That statement is pretty much entirely contested by Ms Higgins, who claims she was given a Hobson’s choice of returning to her home on the Gold Coast or supporting the Minister in Western Australia in the election campaign. If Ms Higgins did the former, it was made clear to her in discussions with her colleagues, her job as a political adviser would end.

The apologies have come thick and fast but they are heavily qualified — the weasel words of “I am sorry if she feels that way,” type. These are not the words of genuine remorse or lasting regret.

What Ms Higgins says about the responses from her employer, a Minister of the Crown and ultimately, the Morrison government, was almost identical to the ones that came from the playbook of institutions facing child sexual assault allegations, presented to Australians in five years of gruelling evidence to a Royal Commission.

This week’s counterpoint to the flowery words of regret offered by the political class back then, urging the broader Australian community to listen and respect allegations of sexual abuse, shows they have learned nothing from it.