Higgins payout raises questions

Taxpayers who footed the bill for Brittany Higgins’ $2.44m payout, authorised by the Albanese government, are entitled to know the reasons for it. The amount, Janet Albrechtsen and Stephen Rice revealed in The Australian on Friday, relied entirely on the ­former Liberal staffer’s version of events, despite contrary versions from other key witnesses who were excluded from the single-day mediation of the claim.

The settlement covered $1.48m for loss of earning capacity (for 40 years), $400,000 for hurt, distress and humiliation, $220,000 for medical costs, $100,000 for domestic help and $245,000 for legal costs. The details emerged this week during the defamation trial brought by Bruce Lehrmann against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson over Ms Higgins’ allegations on The Project that he raped her in Parliament House in 2019.

The public surely is entitled to wonder what, if any, dereliction of duty by the commonwealth – ministers, staff or public servants – warranted such compensation. That point is especially pertinent because the deed of settlement shows the commonwealth did not admit it had breached its duty of care to Ms Higgins. Dated December 13, 2022, it states the parties agreed to resolve all claims between them “without any ­admissions of liability”.

That contradicts what Ms Higgins told the court on Tuesday when she said “the commonwealth ­admitted that they breached their duty of care and that they didn’t go through proper processes, so that’s actually why they ­settled with me”. It is appropriate that the national anti-corruption watchdog is examining a complaint by former Liberal minister Linda Reynolds against Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus over his handling of the payment to determine if an investigation should be launched.