Australia's Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme has released its report. It describes the Scheme as "an illconceived, embryonic idea and rushed to Cabinet".
Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Tabled_Documents/2743
Some summary quotes:
From the Preface:
It is remarkable how little interest there seems to have been in ensuring the Scheme’s legality, how rushed its implementation was, how little thought was given to how it would affect welfare recipients and the lengths to which public servants were prepared to go to oblige ministers on a quest for savings. Truly dismaying was the revelation of dishonesty and collusion to prevent the Scheme’s lack of legal foundation coming to light. Equally disheartening was the ineffectiveness of what one might consider institutional checks and balances – the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office, the Office of Legal Services Coordination, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – in presenting any hindrance to the Scheme’s continuance.
From the Conclusion:
The report paints a picture of how the Robodebt Scheme (the Scheme) was put together on an illconceived, embryonic idea and rushed to Cabinet. If ever there were a case of giving an unproportion’d thought his act, this was it.
The application of [public interest] immunity has also limited the Commission’s ability to reveal the entirety of the documentation concerning how the original proposal which became Robodebt, was passed and what was put to Cabinet thereafter. The salient points have been able to be made, but large parts of the relevant ministerial briefs, materials put before Cabinet and Cabinet minutes themselves have not been able to be revealed.
One of the questions in the Terms of Reference is when the Australian Government knew or ought to have known that debts were not, or may not have been, validly raised. [...] Some DHS senior executives always had that knowledge; some DSS senior executives must have suspected it, at least by 2016. As to members of the Government, one Minister, Mr Morrison, took the proposal to Cabinet, knowing that it involved income averaging and that his own Department had indicated that it would require legislative change, but on the basis of the contrary indication in the NPP checklist, proceeded without enquiring as to how the change had come about.
And... this ticking time-bomb from the covering letter:
I have provided to you an additional chapter of the report which has not been included in the bound report and is sealed. It recommends the referral of individuals for civil action or criminal prosecution. I recommend that this additional chapter remain sealed and not be tabled with the rest of the report so as not to prejudice the conduct of any future civil action or criminal prosecution.
Some news articles:
I honestly didn't think much would come out of this Royal Commission, but I'm impressed. The whole thing has been an unmitigated disaster. It's even been linked to suicides.
Maybe the people responsible will actually face consequences, but I'm still not going to hold my breath.
From the report, p. 106:
From the ABC:
Well, we've already seen how Scott Morrison's government operated. In my opinion, he's perhaps the shonkiest prime minister we've ever had and I don't trust his public statements about Robodebt for a second.
I really wonder if he's among those who have been referred to the Australian Federal Police, but there's no way to know at this stage.
Commissioner Holmes said that some of Morrison's evidence to the Commission was untrue:
He's in deep shit.
He did seem to operate to a different definition of "truth" and "honesty" to the rest of us.
Notably, Alan Tudge and Stuart Robert have both been very quick to say publicly that they were not referred to the AFP. It seems people who were named in that private chapter were notified. Tudge and Robert say they weren't notified. Meanwhile, Morrison's silence is deafening.
We can only wait and see. There are a few Ministers and public servants who deserve quite a bit of "justice" dumped on them for this shambolic scheme.
That does sound serious. Does it mean Morrison is considered to have lied, or just he couldn't demonstrate it was true to a satisfactory standard for the Commission?
(reposted because I accidentally posted this at the top-level before)
I don't know. I didn't see that section of his testimony, and the report doesn't specify.
No worries, maybe we'll find out in the future.
Lest anyone think that illegitimate social insurance clawback programs enforced by shoddily conceived algorithms are limited to Australia, the U.S. has similar problems. Across the English-speaking world, right-wing governments often simultaneously act on bad ideas, facilitated by the globalization of information.
The only things that distinguish Morrison's government are the magnitude of ineptitude, and impunity to the public appearance of corruption.