A high stakes bid for equality

Just because Labor and the green-left media have weaponised sexual assault allegations does not mean we should duck a broader discussion.

The Coalition cannot say they were not warned. Labor and the media made the misogyny charge a decade ago in the Gillard years.

Just because Labor and the green-left media have weaponised sexual assault allegations in a party-­political fashion does not mean we should duck a broader discussion. And just because the hyper-partisan muck raking has stooped to such rancid levels that it threatens the rule of law and the presumption of innocence, it does not mean that the Coalition is blameless in the subsequent gender wars.

Politics in the digital age has become a captive of memes. And the meme of the moment, revived from a decade ago, is that the ­Coalition has a woman problem.

The pile-on is vile. Greens senator Larissa Waters dubbed Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton a “rape apologist” and news.com.au reporter Samantha Maiden has victim-shamed Liberal MP Nicolle Flint for calling police onto a stalker and characterising attacks (including the daubing of her ­electorate office with the word “skank”) as sexist.

Anti-conservative forces, from GetUp! and the Greens to the ALP and ABC, are attracted to the toxic turf of identity politics to hurt conservatives. Under Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese, Labor failed to make inroads on the dominant ­issues of economic management, taxation, border protection and climate policy.

So now, just as Gillard did, ­Albanese desperately smears the Coalition as misogynistic.

Labor has jumped on board the ABC’s shameful prosecution by media of Christian Porter, thumbing their nose at the rule of law. This is despite Shorten enjoying the presumption of innocence in a similar historical rape accusation that was more straightforward ­because the alleged victim lodged a police complaint.

The opposition/media crush pretends away three crucial facts: Porter’s alleged victim withdrew her complaint; the document purporting to detail her claims is of unclear origins and was not signed; and the anonymous letter the ABC used to publicise the claims reveals the alleged victim’s family believed she might have concocted the claims.

Liberal MPs, from left: Sarah Henderson, Lucy Wicks, Katie Allen and Hollie Hughes say the party must have a conversation about quotas. Picture: Gary Ramage

The media mob also ignore the bizarre twists, inconsistencies and implausible scenarios outlined in these documents, preferring to portray a compelling case while underplaying both Porter’s denials and the police decision not to proceed.

In the Brittany Higgins case, the media meme forgets to mention that this young Liberal staffer was encouraged and supported in going to police, was offered counselling, and made her own decision not to pursue criminal sanction. For all the empathy she is due over what she describes as a disgusting and callous alleged rape, it is imperative to consider the blatant and unforgivable breach of privacy that would have occurred if anyone passed on her allegations to the Prime Minister or anyone else — Higgins was the only one who had the right to decide who should know.

We know she chose to keep working in government, switched to another minister’s office, and eventually left before going public with her anger and disappointment. Just over a week after launching an orchestrated media campaign detailing her claims, Higgins met with police to lodge a formal complaint. Higgins had every right to handle the case any way she saw fit, but it is clearly relevant that the claim was aired in the media and politics before police were re-engaged.

Australian Federal Police commissioner Reece Kershaw said in a letter to the Prime Minister, prompted by the Higgins allegations, that sexual assaults should be reported promptly to police. “Failure to report alleged criminal behaviour in this manner,” the commissioner wrote, “or choosing to communicate or disseminate allegations via other means, such as through the media or third parties, risks prejudicing any subsequent police investigation.”

Kershaw’s letter also reaffirmed the need for politicians to pass allegations on to the police, which might have inadvertently prompted the anonymous letter to three politicians detailing the historical Porter allegations. This was an opportune way to put into the public arena allegations the ABC had been trying to reveal for months.

Porter’s move to sue for defamation effectively could put Louise Milligan’s journalism on trial, along with the ABC’s standards. The acquittal of Cardinal George Pell left them badly exposed; this could be even more egregious for them.

Anti-conservative forces, from GetUp! and the Greens to the ALP and ABC, are attracted to the toxic turf of identity politics to hurt conservatives. Picture: Getty

One fascinating question might be asked in this trial: whose brainchild was the anonymous letter? Perhaps the plan came from someone in media, in the law, or politics. And if it arose solely from the unnamed “friends”, why did they choose to override their deceased friend’s decision not to proceed?

The final paragraph in Porter’s statement of claim sums up what is at stake for the ABC and our rule of law. “Milligan acted with malice knowing of the impossibility of any finding of guilt or civil liability in the circumstances and believing that a public campaign designed to damage his reputation would be a more effective substitute against Porter in replacement of the process of the justice system.”

Yes, if the ABC succeeds in ­destroying Porter, this nation will be left in a very dark place.

Who would be next? And on what evidence?

For all these reasons, we should be reluctant to join the media/political posse trying to frame the Morrison government as a sexist frat house. Beware the media mob; the more they egg each other on, the more truth is disregarded. But resisting the political crusade does not mean downplaying the issues. The Coalition should call out the vicious, hypocritical politicking while still focusing on the issues highlighted as a result — such as women’s safety, sexual harassment, workplace equality and ­female representation.

In a column for The Sunday Mail six years ago I suggested we blokes ought to try to put ourselves in women’s shoes and wrote about the “rotten burden half the population is forced to bear” on personal security. Men should not accept that this was the way of the world. “We should always be working on ways to eradicate this unfair burden on women.”

This should be a constant project of improvement and should need no prompting.

The grubby revelations about Liberal staffers sharing obscene pictures and videos underlines how the digital world and pornographic culture have created a whole new era where such despicable antics no longer surprise us, wherever they occur. The repellent lies and abuse of Twitter are coarsening debate, encouraging bullying and disproportionately targeting conservative women. Sexual harassment raises its head daily, often in workplaces.

The issues and possible remedies are myriad, complex and ­ongoing. But if we are talking about reshaping and improving our culture when it comes to ­sexual equality, then it defies common sense that better representation of women in lawmaking and policy formulating forums would not help.

So it is little wonder attention has turned to quotas as the way to boost the number of women in ­Coalition ranks. This debate is not new but will proceed with renewed urgency now that it has been given licence by a Prime Minister who is battered and bruised by five weeks of political assault.

Morrison has a blokey demeanour and has made some ­missteps in tone rather than substance. Too often he seeks to personalise these issues, which suits his enemies because they want to damage his standing.

The Prime Minister needs to speak to the big picture. No one should need reminding about the daily power and resonance of these issues.

Female representation is no cure all — Higgins’ alleged rape occurred in a female minister’s ­office after all — but there is little doubt that it would help in tone and perspective.

Female quotas are a concept anathema to many Liberals who see them as an attack on merit. Yet on the raw numbers of female ­representation, especially in safe seats where it really matters, it is not working right now. This ­creates a political vulnerability if nothing else.

Merit might not work so well anyway, if selection panels have a uniform perspective of what might be required. The worst thing that could happen with quotas is that somewhere, sometime a woman of merit might be selected ahead of a man judged by some to be more meritorious — cry me a river.

Interestingly, the options put to government by the co-design process for an Indigenous voice (and let me remind you of my interest as a member) all mandate equal representation for men and women. There was broad consensus that to be truly representative and accurately reflect grassroots issues and concerns there must be an equal voice given to female perspectives. So, while advocating an effective gender quota for my Aboriginal compatriots, it would be inconsistent for me to argue that non-Aboriginal women deserve any less.

The Coalition cannot say they were not warned. Labor and the media made the misogyny charge a decade ago in the Gillard years. Will a blokey Coalition leave itself open to this attack again in 2030?