Remember Robotdebt? That’s the shameful episode when the Australian Government hounded its poorest citizens to payback welfare money, driving some to suicide.
The National Anti-Corruption Commission will reconsider its decision not to investigate referrals from the Robodebt royal commission, after finding the commissioner did not properly deal with a declared conflict of interest.
Commissioner Paul Brereton declared he had a “close association” with one of the people referred to the NACC by the Robodebt royal commission, and so delegated decision-making to one of his deputies.
But the NACC inspector determined he should have removed himself entirely, and that the deputy would have been fully aware of commissioner Brereton’s conflict of interest, as well as his views on the referred person’s exercise of their powers in the Robodebt saga.
The inspector’s report contained no suggestion of actual bias or intentional wrongdoing.
An independent “eminent person” will now decide whether or not the commission should investigate the matter.
The inspector of the NACC said it received more than 1,200 complaints relating to the decision not to investigate, which broadly expressed “profound disappointment” in the decision.
Complainants said the watchdog breached public trust by not investigating the Robodebt referrals, “particularly in circumstances where the royal commissioner purposely referred the Referred Persons to the NACC because she did not have any authority to take action”.
Royal Commissioner Catherine Holmes referred six people to the corruption watchdog over their roles in the illegal automated debt-raising scheme run by Centrelink under several Coalition ministers.