Anthony Albanese has sought to distinguish “anonymous suggestions” of mistreatment of women in Labor from the storm surrounding the government, arguing that the party would need allegations against “specific individuals” to investigate.
The Labor leader said on Monday that he had read the anonymous complaints circulated in a closed Facebook group and found the allegations of sexual harassment and abuse while at work “very disappointing”.
Albanese encouraged any complainants to come forward – noting Labor had set up new procedures to handle them – but refused to say whether the unnamed men should step aside.
The allegations, first published by news.com.au, include claims one man punched the wall next to his female staffer’s head, one had sex with a young woman who had no ability to consent due to intoxication, and many instances of demeaning and sexist language.
Albanese told reporters in Canberra that “harassment, sexism and patriarchy” were not confined to one side of politics but were prevalent throughout society.
He noted that Labor had set up a new code of conduct to deal with complaints including sexual harassment and bullying. The code allows alleged victims to access external advice and have their complaints dealt with by officials outside parliament.
Albanese noted that “no names have been put forward” in the allegations, which were published anonymously in the closed Elizabeth Reid Network Facebook group for current and former female Labor staffers.
“I encourage people to come forward,” he said. “It is hard to look into anonymous suggestions. That is the truth.”
Albanese said he was not aware of any allegations against members of his caucus. He said he believed “women who come forward” but refused to commit to taking action against unnamed men accused of wrongdoing.
“I will not deal with things hypothetically in advance. If there are allegations put forward against anyone in the Labor party, that should be dealt with at the time.”
Albanese conceded he was aware of one allegation – he would not say whether it amounted to sexual harassment or assault – that had been “dealt with confidentially” and the woman concerned was “satisfied” with the way the complaint had been handled.
Asked if the party had received any complaints under the new process, a Labor spokesperson told Guardian Australia it was “complainant-centred” and “must ensure confidentiality”.
“We would only ever make details public with the permission of complainants, including confirming whether complaints have been received.”
Albanese said he had “not seen any allegations against any specific individuals”.
By contrast, the federal attorney general, Christian Porter, faced a “very specific allegation … with a name attached, with documentation, with people coming forward, saying that they had knowledge at the time of those issues”.
Porter has been accused of an alleged sexual assault in January 1988 when he was 17 and the alleged victim was 16. Porter has strenuously denied the allegation.
After making a complaint to New South Wales police in 2019, the woman withdrew from the investigation without making a formal statement and took her own life.
The allegation was reinvigorated by a letter containing a written statement from the alleged victim sent to Scott Morrison and three other parliamentarians in February.
Since Porter took mental health leave, the government has faced mounting pressure from friends and family of the deceased woman to call an independent inquiry.
On Friday, the woman’s ex-boyfriend James Hooke revealed that he had “relevant discussions” with the woman from mid-1988 and with Porter from 1992.
Albanese said it was “not realistic” for the prime minister to say that “everybody should just move on” without inquiring into the allegation, because the police had not been able to investigate.
Albanese said Morrison’s response had consisted of “having a discussion with Christian Porter” and believing his denial, but the prime minister “didn’t bother to read the documentation” containing the complaint.
Morrison has declared Porter is “an innocent man under our law” because he is entitled to the presumption of innocence, but has resisted calls for independent inquiry or to even seek legal advice about whether an inquiry is compatible with the rule of law.
