A UN report on poverty and human rights has taken aim at welfare systems in several countries, including Australia.
Special rapporteur Phil Alston, who is Australian, said digital technologies in welfare systems are being increasingly used to punish individuals.
“As humankind moves, perhaps inexorably, towards the digital welfare future, it needs to alter course significantly and rapidly to avoid stumbling zombie-like into a digital welfare dystopia,” Alston said on Friday.
He argued a lack of a legal basis for Australia’s automated welfare debt-recovery system showed a lack of attention from the Morrison government.
Evidence provided to the special rapporteur showed very high error rates in the robo-debt scheme.
Describing the Australian scheme as a fiasco, Alston said automated calculation systems had been open to error or failure around the world.
He argued the lack of a legal basis also meant less political transparency and public confidence in the system.
On cashless welfare cards, Alston said the private tech companies behind their design were operating in a “human rights free zone”, with a lack of government regulation and resistance to considering human rights.
He also argued the cards were allowing the private sector to play a lead role in the public welfare system, which led to a “lack of transparency”.
Alston has taken issue with a “digital dashboard” used by Australian welfare recipients to report mandatory activities and check compliance with their obligations.
He said the lack of human interaction with an automated system “fails to take real-life situations into account”.
Sweden has been forced to reverse its complex digital welfare network, because 15 per cent of the automated decisions being made were incorrect.
The UN report said software used by Australian welfare agencies led to $CAD140 million ($AU156 million) worth of errors in Canada.
Want to comment?
Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.
We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.
InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.
We value local independent journalism. We hope you do too.
InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.