Sometimes what seems to be the cleverest solution to one problem can prove to be the dumbest when other factors are considered. I have a feeling that Attorney-General Christian Porter\u2019s defamation actions against the ABC and journalist Louise Milligan may become a case in point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The move must seem irresistibly clever to Coalition strategists. It provides a piece of cover for the Government\u2019s already strenuous efforts to shut down discussion of the historical rape allegations against the Attorney-General. It involves putting massive pressure \u2013 including more financial pressure \u2013 on the Government\u2019s hated ABC. It shows again that individual journalists can be targeted for their work (remember the AFP raids?). It allows the Government to assert \u2013 as the prime minister already has \u2013 that the defamation action is a satisfactory substitute for an independent inquiry that many have been asking for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of Mr Porter\u2019s high-priced legal team, \u201creputational expert\u201d Rebekah Giles, claimed Porter had been the victim of a \u201ctrial by media\u201d which should \u201cend with the commencement of these proceedings\u201d. \u201cThe claims made by the ABC and Ms Milligan will be determined in a court in a procedurally fair process,\u201d Giles said. \u201cMr Porter will have and will exercise the opportunity to give evidence denying these false allegations on oath.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In other words, now the defamation action has been announced we want the media to stop talking about the issue, because somehow a defamation trial will be a good forum to obtain the truth of the matter. So stop asking for an inquiry because this will be one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Such an ideal strategy, right?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Well, maybe. But then again, maybe not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As I\u2019ve written before, this present chapter of the long-running saga of misogyny in Australian politics isn\u2019t like some of the earlier ones. It feels different, like a line has finally been crossed. And the anger about the apparent suppression of the rape allegations by parliamentary staffer Brittany Higgins \u2013 the apparent refusal to listen and the seeming impunity afforded the alleged perpetrator \u2013 is a real-world phenomenon, not a political artifice. Scott Morrison seemed almost to realise this, albeit dimly, when he dropped his \u201cfather of daughters\u201d clanger, apparently inspired by a conversation with his wife over the rights and wrongs of rape. But having made that mistake he seemed to pull up the drawbridge, order more pots of boiling oil and set the archers on the battlements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When the historical rape allegations emerged \u2013 to be strenuously denied by Mr Porter \u2013 Morrison and his Government seemed to be in full defensive mode. No further wifely consultations were referred to. Documents were studiously unread. The convenient disinterest of Constable Plod was trumpeted as akin to a declaration of the falsity of the allegations, and the denials of the accused were given the status of an ironclad verdict of innocence. All the while shouting about the \u201crule of law\u201d and shutting down the conversation at every opportunity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If they weren\u2019t politicians, or if they were politicians with an ear for the real world like \u2013 for example \u2013 New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern, they\u2019d have seen that it didn\u2019t have to be like this. There were other ways to handle it. A real leader might have said: \u201cWhile I fully support my Attorney-General and accept his denials, I\u2019ve spoken to him at length and \u2013 having read the allegations that were made by a person now sadly deceased \u2013 we\u2019ve agreed that the important thing is to provide a forum where the Australian people can see all the facts of the matter, openly and honestly. We\u2019ve both agreed that these are terrible allegations from any point of view and we agree that, painful as it is for the Attorney-General, he will stand aside while this inquiry proceeds. We want the matter resolved transparently and as quickly as it can be.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Somebody else could have stepped up to be Attorney-General. Porter would have stayed in Parliament while the inquiry progressed and, assuming he was cleared in due course, would have come back stronger than before to a Government that had clawed back some moral high ground and won respect from many voters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Instead, they\u2019ve taken the path that looked politically smart. Hunker down, lash out, deny, refuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Prime Minister\u2019s decision to avoid the protesters in Canberra, and his decision to instead make a speech suggesting the protesters should be pleased they aren\u2019t being shot, are more of the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These are presumably political decisions made by a Government that has shown again and again that it cares much more about political appearances than about substance. And yet, even by that cynical measure, it\u2019s handling of this whole snowballing disaster has been incomprehensibly wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the real world, where people make decisions about how to vote, the Government has made itself look bad. It took a matter of genuine concern to a great many people and treated it like a faked up political stunt. And every single time it got a chance to start to turn that mistake around, it threw the chance away and gave the finger instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I doubt whether all the bluster, hired muscle and fake news distractions will rescue Scomo from this mess. The defamation action, which at first glance may seem so clever for so many political reasons, is the icing on a bad cake made of wrong ingredients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Let\u2019s see who ends up having to eat it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n