The National Anti-Corruption Commission revealed that six individuals were referred for investigation over the former government’s robo-debt scheme but ultimately decided not to pursue any of them. The commission stated that it was unlikely further evidence could be collected, as the conduct of the individuals had been extensively discussed in the report of Catherine Holmes, SC, who conducted the royal commission into the welfare crackdown. The decision was made to avoid conducting multiple investigations into the same matter, which could lead to inconsistent outcomes and subject individuals to repeated investigations. Five of the six individuals referred were also investigated by the Australian Public Service Commission.
The robodebt royal commission had made damning findings about the former Coalition government’s operation of the scheme, stating that it was plagued by collusion and dishonesty in concealing its unlawfulness. The NACC stated that there was no value in duplicating work already being done by other agencies, including the royal commission and the APSC. The commission cannot impose sanctions like the APSC and could not make recommendations beyond those made by the royal commission. It was also noted that an investigation by the NACC would not provide any remedy or redress for the recipients of government payments or their families who had suffered due to the robodebt scheme. The scheme aimed to identify overpaid Centrelink benefits using an automated system of income averaging, but was flawed and resulted in debts being calculated based on incorrect data.
The robodebt scheme recovered about $750 million from approximately 380,000 people before it was found to be unlawful. The Commonwealth settled a test case in 2019 and admitted that raising a debt using income averaging was illegal. Originally intended as a $1.7 billion savings measure, the scheme ended up costing the public more than it was designed to save. A class action lawsuit resulted in a settlement of $1.8 billion in June 2021, which a judge described as a “shameful chapter in public administration.” The NACC’s decision not to pursue the individuals referred to it for investigation highlights the challenges and complexities involved in addressing corruption and misuse of government funds. It also underscores the importance of thorough investigations and accountability in government operations to prevent similar scandals in the future.
