Advertisement

Robodebt victims had ‘ice cube’s chance in hell’ with Centrelink

The robodebt royal commissioner has told a bureaucrat there would have been “an ice cube’s chance in hell” of the debts of some people being erased, and the response to questions over the scheme’s legality was to “hunker down and wait to be sued”.

Feb 22, 2023, updated Feb 22, 2023
Robodebt Royal Commissioner Catherine Holmes's 990 page report includes recommendations for civil and criminal prosecution. Photo: AAP/Supplied

Robodebt Royal Commissioner Catherine Holmes's 990 page report includes recommendations for civil and criminal prosecution. Photo: AAP/Supplied

Former department of human services general counsel Matthew Roser told Wednesday’s hearing a sworn affidavit in the court case of Melbourne nurse Madeleine Masterton’s gave credibility to her statement that she had properly declared her income in the past.

The exchange drew the ire of Commissioner Catherine Holmes.

“So if all those people who had contacted Centrelink saying ‘but I declared my income properly’ had just put in statutory declarations, that would’ve been accepted?” she said.

“The assertion, sworn or not, that income had been correctly declared wouldn’t have stood an ice cube’s chance in hell against the (online compliance intervention) program.”

Roser responded he assumed that would have been the case but he didn’t work in the relevant department.

Holmes then expressed her “incredulity” the affidavit from Masterton’s solicitor was taken more seriously than customer complaints.

“It wasn’t even her sworn account, it was her solicitor’s affidavit, it was hearsay,” she said.

“So, in an evidentiary sense, it was worth even less than your average Centrelink customer ringing up and saying, ‘I declared my income correctly’.”

The hearing also heard eminent lawyer Peter Hanks had warned of the legal and moral consequences of the robodebt scheme.

Roser agreed Hanks’ warnings were something to be taken seriously given his stature in the legal profession.

He said there was no need for him to take the warning further with “all the relevant people” at a conference where Hanks spoke on the legal concerns.

“We were all quite clear about the potential (legal) exposure and that it could be significant is probably an understatement on a number of fronts,” Roser told the hearing.

“I didn’t feel any need to clarify that because I think it was known.”

The former general counsel denied the accusation the department’s approach was to “hunker down and hope they don’t sue or worry about it when they do sue”.

“My understanding was that these matters have been considered and that a decision had been made that there was an ability for the department to proceed with the scheme in its then current form,” he said.

The commissioner hit back: “Sounds pretty much like hunkering down and waiting for them to sue”.

The department’s former acting chief counsel Tim Ffrench told the hearing he had reservations about the scheme’s legality and seeking outside legal advice would have been prudent.

He said he believed bureaucrats were scared to raise issues with the scheme because of a hostile attitude by the people in charge of making the policy who “were determined to achieve a particular outcome for government”.

“Once they’d reached that state of mind, an inquiry into (legal) issues was not something that was fostered by that culture,” Ffrench said.

“I believe the culture and environment at that time prevented people from asking the questions that they should have asked because of the fear that those questions would be seen as potentially impertinent.”

-with AAP

Local News Matters
Advertisement
Copyright © 2024 InDaily.
All rights reserved.