Opinion

Better hold off on that cash-splashing for a while, Britt. Ever since she trousered $2.4 million of Australian taxpayers’ hard-earned, Brittany Higgins and her boyfriend have been whooping it up in exotic locales from the Seychelles to the South of France. But, even as the payout was made, eyebrows were raised. Mostly because it looked, to some cynics, an awful lot like a payoff for doing a new government’s dirty work in the lead-up to the election.

After all, the millions were doled out after a “mediation” which was over in less time than it took to get through the morning tea. Where the new government essentially agreed with everything Higgins said, and blocked anyone else from telling their side of the story.

No doubt it was pure coincidence that Higgins’ allegations had been ruthlessly weaponised by the then-opposition in order to demonise the government in the pre-election year.

Liberal frontbencher Michaelia Cash has confirmed she was never asked for her version of events before the Albanese Government paid out $2.4 million to Brittany Higgins warning there are now “serious questions” about the compo deal.

News.com.au

It seems that the judge in former defendant Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case has questions, too. Justice Michael Lee has asked whether Higgins should be recalled to give evidence about the payout.

Justice Michael Lee emailed parties to the defamation case earlier this week after receiving a submission from Ten that allegations Ms Higgins had “committed a fraud on the common­wealth” should not be adjudi­cated in the case.

Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers had argued that Ms Higgins made 11 separate representations about her alleged rape in her settlement that were either false or contradicted by her own evidence in the defamation case.

Ms Higgins made false representation “for the purposes of securing a life-changing payment” and were a breach of the warranties made by her in the deed, Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers ­alleged.

At issue is Higgins’ credibility as a witness.

Earlier this month, Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers set out a detailed comparison of the claims Ms Higgins made in the commonwealth deed with her evidence in the still-to-be-decided defamation case.

Among the claims made by Ms Higgins in the settlement deed, but disputed in a submission by Mr Lehrmann’s legal team, led by Steven Whybrow SC, were:

  • That Mr Lehrmann got into Ms Higgins’ taxi on the night of the alleged rape without her agreement (she testified she had agreed).
  • That he directed the cab to stop at Parliament House without her agreement (she gave evidence that she “just went along with it”);
  • That he directed her to get out of the cab (she testified that “I don’t know why, but when it stopped I got out too”);
  • That they didn’t speak on the Monday afterwards (they had coffee and exchanged emails).

These are far from the only apparent porkies Higgins has either admitted to, or been caught out in, throughout the whole affair.

Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers also point to claims made in the deed that have been strongly disputed in evidence, including that Ms Higgins told Fiona Brown – who was the chief of staff of Miss Higgins’ boss at the time, senator Linda Reynolds – that he had ­sexually assaulted her, an allegation that has always been vehemently denied by Ms Brown.

The settlement deed also stated Senator Reynolds did not ­engage with Ms Higgins at all during the election campaign. “She avoided (Ms Higgins) and made clear she did not want (Ms Higgins) attending events with her,” the settlement deed stated.

In fact, Ms Higgins was photographed seated next to Senator Reynolds during the election.

Given all that, it seems fair for Australian taxpayers to ask whether the Albanese government should have relied entirely on Higgins’ say-so when handing over a wad of millions of Australian taxpayers’ money.

Earlier this year, The Australian revealed that the National Anti-Corruption Commission was examining a complaint by Senator Reynolds against Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus over his handling of the Higgins settlement, to determine if an investigation should be launched.

The Australian

Then there’s the separate defamation action by Higgins’ old boss, former Defence Minister Linda Reynolds. Between the lawyer’s bills and any possible outcome, young Brittany might want to start putting a few francs aside for a rainy day.

If You Like What You Just Read,
Click Here to Become a Member and Directly Support This Author.
If you enjoyed this article please share it using the share buttons at the top or bottom of the article.

Punk rock philosopher. Liberalist contrarian. Grumpy old bastard. I grew up in a generational-Labor-voting family. I kept the faith long after the political left had abandoned it. In the last decade...