The National Anti-Corruption Commission has revealed six people were referred to it for investigation over the former government’s robo-debt scheme but has decided not to pursue any of them.
In a statement released this afternoon, the national integrity body said it was unlikely further evidence could be collected after the conduct of the six individuals was discussed extensively in the 990-page report of Catherine Holmes, SC, who conducted the royal commission into the welfare crackdown.
Inaugural National Anti-Corruption Commissioner Paul Brereton.Credit: AAP
“In the absence of a real likelihood of a further investigation producing significant new evidence, it is undesirable for a number of reasons to conduct multiple investigations into the same matter. This includes the risk of inconsistent outcomes, and the oppression involved in subjecting individuals to repeated investigations,” the NACC statement said.
The Robo-debt royal commission last July referred several unnamed individuals for potential criminal or civil action over the unlawful welfare crackdown after making damning findings about the former Coalition government’s operation of the scheme.
Loading
Holmes said at the time the scheme was plagued by collusion and dishonesty in concealing its unlawfulness.
The watchdog revealed five of the six people referred to it were also referred to the Australian Public Service Commission for investigation.
“There is not value in duplicating work that has been or is being done by others, in this case with the investigatory powers of the Royal Commission, and the remedial powers of the APSC,” the NACC said.
Further, it said that beyond finding whether or not the conduct in question was corrupt, it couldn’t impose sanctions like the APSC could, nor make any recommendation not made by the royal commission.
“An investigation by the Commission would not provide any individual remedy or redress for the recipients of government payments or their families who suffered due to the Robodebt Scheme,” it said.
Loading
Robo-debt was aimed at identifying people who had been overpaid Centrelink benefits by using an automated system of income averaging to help identify alleged discrepancies between their reported income and income data held by the Tax Office.
But the scheme, which recovered about $750 million from about 380,000 people, was flawed and resulted in debts being calculated based on incorrect data.
The Commonwealth settled a test case in 2019 and conceded that raising a debt using income averaging was unlawful.
Originally billed as a $1.7 billion savings measure, the scheme ended up costing the public more than it was designed to reap after the Commonwealth settled a class action for $1.8 billion in the Federal Court in June 2021, in what a judge described as a “shameful chapter in public administration”.