One thing anti-corruption investigation into Brittany Higgins' $2.4m payout didn't reveal
This morning, the National Anti-Corruption Watchdog took out the trash.
What did the long-running corruption investigation into the Albanese Government's decision to award the payout find after years of demands that it investigate?
'There is no evidence that the settlement process, including the legal advice provided, who was present at the mediation, or the amount, was subject to any improper influence by any Commonwealth public official,'' the NACC found.
'There is therefore no corruption issue.'
In other words, claims that the Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus or the Albanese Government acted improperly were unfounded.
Of course, citizens remain free to question the size of the payout, or argue that Senator Linda Reynolds, who was not present at the mediation despite her requests to attend, should have been granted greater taxpayer-funded rights to legally dispute the claim.
As an aside, the Albanese Government did agree for taxpayers to pay for her lawyers to refer Brittany Higgins' payout to the NACC.
Senator Reynolds' legal team is also arguing in the Federal Court that she was forced to run a defamation action in WA against Ms Higgins because of the Commonwealth's conduct in relation to the payout.
But there was no evidence, according to the NACC, of corruption or improper behaviour in the decision to award Ms Higgins the compensation in 2022.
'Documents produced showed that decisions made in relation to the settlement were based on advice from independent external solicitors and experienced senior and junior counsel,'' the statement said.
'Initial advice was received during the period of the Liberal-National Coalition government, before the May 2022 election.
'There was no material difference in the updated legal advice later provided to the new Labor government. Nor was there any identifiable difference in approach to the matter before and after the change in government.
'There was no inappropriate intervention in the process by or on behalf of any minister. The then Attorney-General approved the settlement in accordance with the Departmental advice.'
Mediation in one day 'unexceptional'
According to the NACC, The Commonwealth engaged in mediation consistent with Departmental advice that was informed by legal advice,'' the statement says.
'That the mediation conference itself was concluded within a day is unexceptional,'' the NACC said.
'It was the culmination of a process which took approximately 12 months. None of this is unusual for a non-litigated personal injury claim.
'A critical consideration during the settlement process was avoiding ongoing trauma to Ms Higgins.'
Settlement amount
'The settlement amount was less than the maximum amount recommended by the external independent legal advice,'' the statement says.
'There is no evidence that the settlement process, including the legal advice provided, who was present at the mediation, or the amount, was subject to any improper influence by any Commonwealth public official.
'To the contrary, the evidence obtained reflected a process that was based on independent external legal advice, without any inappropriate intervention by any minister of either government. There is therefore no corruption issue.'
What the NACC didn't say
And in the thousands of words written on this saga it's worth noting something the NACC did not mention when shooting down the conspiracy theories.
The Morrison Government engaged in the exact same process when it agreed to payout $600,000 to former cabinet minister Alan Tudge's former press secretary and ex-lover Rachelle Miller in 2022.
He wasn't interviewed. He was never asked about her claims as part of the final payout negotiations and he wasn't invited to the mediation.
And that's the point. These settlements are not a finding of fact. They are not about making admissions about what did or did not occur.
You can criticise the process by all means, but you can't say the Morrison Government didn't do the same.
They are not a workplace investigation - not that many of them are much better.
They are essentially 'go away' money that the government pays to people when it makes an informed decision that their claim could cost millions more if it is litigated.
Payment made on no admission basis
To understand the $2.4 million payout to Ms Higgins, it is important to understand a few things that are often forgotten in the thousands of words written on the matter.
First, the claim was not solely based on the alleged rape. She alleged the two Liberal Senators exacerbated a 'toxic and harmful' working environment, subjected her to 'victimisation, ostracism' and pressured her not to discuss the assault.
Her former employers, Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash, utterly reject those claims and do not concede for a moment they are true.
Nor does news.com.au assert they are true, only that they were made in a legal document subsequently published by the Federal Court.
Crucially, neither did the Albanese Government despite making the payment.
In making the settlement the government made 'no admissions'. It's hard to understand for the layperson, but the best way to describe it is 'go away' money.
It's probably not surprising however that many people would assume a pay out of such magnitude meant something had gone wrong or that the government was admitting they did something wrong.
In other words, the government's lawyers and insurers are making a judgment call about the likelihood of a successful case, how much damages would be paid and crucially how much the legals would cost.
Inevitably, in fighting a case like this, it could cost taxpayers millions more than the payout alone.
But the payout was never a finding of fact on those claims.
Brittany Higgins herself was rebuked by Justice Lee in the defamation case for not understanding this and what the deed actually said.
Linda Reynolds suing Brittany Higgins
It's abundantly clear however that Ms Higgins' former employer, Linda Reynolds remains aggrieved and affronted by the process.
She's now suing Ms Higgins for defamation over some social media posts in WA. The trial concluded in September but there's no judgment on that matter yet.
In a statement released today, Ms Reynolds said she was bitterly disappointed with the decision.
'My primary concern has always been how the Commonwealth could possibly settle unsubstantiated and statute barred claims made against me, alleging egregious conduct on my part without taking a single statement from me or speaking to me at all,' Senator Reynolds said.
'The effect of the conditions was that I had no personal legal representation at the mediation and no opportunity to defend the serious and baseless allegations against me.'
In her third day of witness testimony in her defamation case against Ms Higgins last year, she slammed Attorney General Mark Dreyfus over his handling of the former Liberal staffer's Commonwealth compensation claim.
She accused him of trying to 'freeze' her out of the settlement process and said Mr Dreyfus denied her a chance to address Ms Higgins' criticism of the Senator's conduct in the wake of the alleged Lehrmann rape.
'I was utterly outraged because this was going to be finally my opportunity to defend against these allegations … which in my mind were utterly defendable,' she told the court.
'To be told my defence would be no defence, as you can see here, I was not to attend the mediation and not to make public comments about the mediation or the civil claims against me … I was outraged.'
'I could see immediately what the Attorney-General was trying to do, which is why I referred it to the National Anti-Corruption Commission,' she said.
Ms Higgins's lawyer Rachael Young SC later told the court that Ms Higgins was 'the survivor of a serious crime which has affected every aspect of her life, including serious impacts on her mental health'.
In the WA Supreme Court, the barrister said Senator Reynolds had disputed the merit of Ms Higgins's $2.4 million Commonwealth compensation payment and leaked details of that settlement to a newspaper, despite being told it was confidential information.
'The senator engaged in a course of conduct to disrupt and undermine the credibility and reliability of her former employee,' Ms Young said.
'That's why we say it's harassment.'
That suggestion was fiercely denied by Ms Reynolds in the proceedings, with her legal team telling court she had kept her promise not to attack Ms Higgins at a great cost to her physical and mental health.
Ms Higgins received a $2.445m settlement in December 2022 – more than three years after she was allegedly raped by her then colleague, Bruce Lehrmann, in March 2019 in Linda Reynolds' ministerial suite.
Mr Lehrmann has always denied that there was any sexual contact, consensual or otherwise. Justice Michael Lee, on a civil basis in a defamation trial, disagreed.
Will the NACC finding and these other inconvenient facts prompt Ms Higgins pitchfork-waving critics to consider their conduct? No chance.
It will be time to shoot the messenger: the NACC.
For critics of Ms Higgins and the Albanese Government who noisily demanded this be investigated for years, it is however a case of be careful what you wish for.
The judgment is in and it's not pretty for those insisting that there was some vast conspiracy connected in the payout.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
3 minutes ago
- ABC News
Victorian government releases damning review into childcare regulation, 22 recommendations made
Victoria's childcare watchdogs are failing to keep kids safe due to poor information sharing, legal constraint, chronic underfunding and a system that places the privacy of educators and the pursuit of profits over child safety, a rapid review has found. The review, commissioned in the wake of more than 70 charges of child abuse against a Melbourne childcare worker in June, calls for a shake-up of the sector with a new independent early childhood regulator established. The report, chaired by former South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill, made 22 recommendations which Premier Jacinta Allan has already committed to adopting, while other recommendations are made to the Commonwealth government. Under the plan, the Working with Children Check (WWCC) scheme will also be beefed up, requiring all applicants to complete child safe training. It will also be easier for a WWCC to be revoked or suspended, with the current threshold too high, the report found. ABC investigations have recently uncovered two male educators, sacked by childcare operators, and banned from the sector, who still had active WWCCs at the time of writing. The report said 'red flags' from unsubstantiated reports to the reportable conduct scheme are not being taken into consideration, with action stifled by poor information sharing between authorities. "The review heard multiple times that the 'breadcrumbs' of information about a person — including information which does not meet the relatively high thresholds for substantiated conduct, but which is nevertheless still concerning — is rarely able to be seen and acted upon because no one can see the whole picture,'' it said. The review said Victoria's WWCC laws were the least flexible, a finding similar to the state's ombudsman in 2022, and will increase pressure on the Allan government to explain why it took so long to improve WWCC laws. Predators have been able to escape sanction in Victoria because some centres have placed profits and reputation above child safety. "There are tensions in the system that lead some providers to prioritise other things, including profit in some instances. The review said greater issues existed in the for-profit childcare sector and called on the Commonwealth to lead a discussion about reconsidering the "current funding model and reliance on the market." While the review warned there's "no silver bullet' it said the Commission for Children and Young People, which receives all allegations of reportable conduct, needs to have restrictions on its work loosened. Across the sector the report urged laws to be re-balanced in favour of protecting children, with the current system stifling reporting. "Current legal frameworks are often interpreted as prioritising procedural fairness for employees, which can act as a brake on employers taking early or decisive action to protect children, for fear of industrial or legal challenges." Reports to the CCYP have grown substantially in recent years, but the funding for the Commission has not increased. The Commission warned that 85 per cent of child abuse and harm investigations receive low or minimal oversight. The government is expected to increase funding to regulators. The recommendations also call for a new early learning national reform commission to be set up to lead a reset of Australia's early childhood sector. It calls for tougher penalties for centres that break the law. The report also says providers need to complete more rigorous recruitment practices, which would be assisted by a comprehensive national workers register. As part of the reforms of the WWCC the government should consider reducing the right of appeal, a move NSW has already taken. "No matter how hard we try to keep predators out, some will get through. The system needs to be able to spot them and act quickly," it said. The report also says staffing levels in centres need to be reconsidered to ensure that 'four eyes' are always on children. It recommended immediate action on the report's findings, including at a meeting of national education ministers on Friday. Premier Jacinta Allan will unveil the government's response this afternoon.
ABC News
3 minutes ago
- ABC News
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese sticks to 'event', rather than 'disaster', to describe SA algal bloom
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says he does not want to "get into semantics" over categorising South Australia's devastating algal bloom as a national disaster but will "provide support as requested". Mr Albanese spent time with locals on Kangaroo Island on Wednesday morning before unveiling new financial support to the tune of $6.25 million and described the event as "heartbreaking". "I want to say to South Australians that the federal government stand side-by-side with you," he said. The funding includes $4 million for local government "for grants to assist those local communities who are dealing with these challenges", $2 million to enhance CSIRO monitoring and data collection of marine heatwaves and $250,000 for algal bloom related research through the national environmental science program. Speaking alongside SA Premier Peter Malinauskas, the prime minister was repeatedly questioned over the federal response to the bloom and whether it should be declared a "natural disaster". While he described Australia as a country that had "always had natural disasters", he drew a distinction between the bloom and other events like floods and bushfires. "There's a specific program that's for floods and for bushfires," he said. "This is something that is a different form of environmental event that is having a significant impact." Mr Albanese defended federal environment minister Murray Watt and said he was a prime minister who represented "the whole country, not just Canberra". "This isn't an event that Murray Watt has created or that any individual has created. This is an event as a result of confluence of events combining to create this impact," he said. The prime minister described suggestions that the federal government would have acted sooner if the bloom had been along the east coast as "absolute nonsense". "I have been to South Australia six times this year," he said. "I have been to South Australia I reckon more than any prime minister over the period of … less than three-and-a-half years. I compare that with any prime minister since federation, probably, but certainly in the last 30 years that is the case." South Australian opposition leader Vincent Tarzia earlier called on Mr Albanese to declare the algal bloom a natural disaster, saying that if he did not do so he should not "bother coming at all". "The time for sympathy and platitudes has long passed, what is needed along our coastline is the acknowledgement of the natural disaster this clearly is," Mr Tarzia said in a statement. "There were heavy rains in Queensland a flood of relief came almost instantly. The prime minister and SA premier today revealed another element of the state-federal $28 million algal bloom support package. Mr Malinauskas said Adelaide-based Agilex Biolabs would be supported to carry out testing for brevetoxins, which have been detected in local shellfish. While brevetoxins are not believed to be caused by Karenia mikimotoi, they can be caused by other Karenia species which are believed to be present in the algal bloom. Mr Malinauskas said that there had previously been no local capacity for brevetoxin testing, and that samples had to go to New Zealand. "Agilex is now embarking on a whole new capability that Australia does not have," he said. "Currently when we are testing within our shellfish, particularly oysters for the brevetoxin which is a product of at least some form of the algae, that testing has to take place in New Zealand." Mr Malinauskas said he had also spoken to Mr Albanese about the state government's summer plan, in the event the bloom continues well into the warmer months. "Hopefully, we don't have to utilise [that]," he said. "But if we do, I know that the federal government is all too willing to hear from us. "We remain hopeful that the algal bloom dissipates but we're not naive to the fact that that may indeed not happen — in fact, I'm of the view that it's becoming increasingly likely that the bloom will be here in some form at least during spring."
ABC News
3 minutes ago
- ABC News
Australian and Queensland governments sign agreement to fund Brisbane Olympics infrastructure
The Commonwealth has agreed to contribute just under half the cost of building the 2032 Olympic Games venues, under a deal struck with the Queensland government. The federal government will provide no more than $3.43bn towards the building of 17 new and upgraded venues for the Games, with the infrastructure expected to cost $7.1bn in total. A significant proportion of that contribution will be spent on the new 63,000-seat stadium at Victoria Park and 25,000-seat National Aquatic Centre in Spring Hill. The Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) gives the Commonwealth seats on the Brisbane 2032 Organising Committee Board and is contingent on the state government developing a plan for Victoria Park which has a "focus on improving access to green space." "We can guarantee you that every part of Victoria Park that's not stadium will be green space," Queensland Minister for Sport Tim Mander said. The Queensland government has also agreed to involve its federal counterparts in naming the Victoria Park stadium and will establish a plaque at the venue acknowledging Commonwealth support. It has long been International Olympic Committee policy that brand names be kept off venues used for the Games. However, the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Games organisers recently announced they were breaking with that policy and allowing companies to sponsor stadiums and arenas. The chair of the LA Games, Casey Wasserman, said the many millions of dollars these sponsorship deals bring in is essential for an Olympic Games which doesn't have a government as its primary funding source. The IGA for the Brisbane 2032 Games also prevents the state government from selling or offering long-term leases on Olympic venues for 25 years, unless the federal government agrees to it. If they are sold or leased in future, the federal government will be entitled to a cut. Mr Mander said the Queensland government was required to demonstrate to the Commonwealth that the venues will be built on time and on budget, and represent a good use of taxpayer funds, before the funding deal could be reached. He said the IGA is an endorsement of that plan, and demonstrates a spirit of cooperation which will help make the games a success. In total, 37 venues across 11 Queensland cities will be used to host the 28 Olympic and 22 Paralympic sports. However, which sports will be included in the games won't be determined until an IOC meeting next year, leaving Brisbane 2032 organisers having to create a venue plan without knowing exactly which sports they need to cater for. "Of course, some of them will be bleedingly obvious, where they will be. There will be others that will need to be worked out," Mr Mander said. New sports can be added to each Olympic Games, on top of the 'core' events. At LA 2028 there will be six additional sports: cricket, baseball, flag football, lacrosse, squash and softball. Mr Mander said he didn't expect to be adding as many as that to the Brisbane 2032 schedule. "It is important to know that any additional sports, outside the 28 core sports, those costs have to be born by the host."
