Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan told he has ‘blood on his hands’

Echo NetDaily, 29 November 2019:

Around 200 people have joined together outside Kevin Hogan’s office in Lismore this morning declaring he has ‘blood on his hands’ as the federal government continues to refuse to take real action on climate change.

Red hand prints are covering the pavement and the front of Hogan’s office. Around 20 kids and students are currently in his office writing him letters about their climate concerns.The police have been in attendance and asked protestors to remove themselves from the road. They said that if protestors remain on the road they would be back with more staff.

One local parent with two children, Ivy Young, was there to point out that politicians need to listen to the experts on climate change and take action.

‘We live on Wallace Ridge which is the ridge dividing Tuntable and Terania Creeks. The fire got to within about two or three properties from us, about 5km up in the forest,’ Ivy told Echonetdaily.

‘I’m here today because I care. I see the urgency to act. I’m worried for the future. We have a window of time where we can actually take the steps to mitigate the worst effects of climate change before we reach tipping points where the sea levels rise and temperatures become too high for many of the places in the world to become habitable......

The toll on New South Wales as of 1 December 2019 flowing from the Morrison Government's refusal to take meaningful action on climate change

If one looks at media records the year 2019 commenced with the odd isolated bushfire fire and continued in the same manner through to July when fire outbreaks began to increase. 

By early September major fire activity was occurring in the Clarence Valley and, by October it was obvious that northern NSW was going to go up in flames.

When November came along many other regions were also battling huge unprecedented bushfires.

The state toll as of 1 December 2019 was:

It is hard to calculate accurately - but at this time it appears that at least 36% to 38% of the 10,441 sq. km Clarence Valley Local Government Area has experienced bushfires, with est. 100 homes and two irreplaceable lives lost.

I hope that Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, every member of his Cabinet, each and every Liberal and Nationals MP and Senator are proud of what their negligence over the last six years of Coalition rule has brought about.

The bushfires continue with no sign of stopping.

Greg Jericho: “Those wanting to appear reasonable and balanced are actually condemning us to inaction on the climate crisis”

Australian Prime Minister & Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison's inability to face the reality that climate change has well and truly arrived and, that the Liberal-Nationals response has been alarmingly inadequate for the last four years under not one but three Liberal Party prime ministers, means that newspaper opinion pieces such as the one below are going to continue to make it into print.   

The Guardian, 24 October 2019:

There is an invidious strain of centrism in Australian media and politics that is one of the most powerful forces against effective action on climate change.

It is a strain that has become more virulent in response to protests by Extinction Rebellion and the raised voices of those who care not to genuflect to the systems that have led us to the current crisis.

It is a strain that conservatives use to their advantage.

Two weeks ago, as New South Wales and parts of Queensland burned, the prime minister was at pains to argue that now was not the time to talk about climate change.

And the centrists agreed.

This week Scott Morrison was ready to talk about climate change and he had the script all prepared.

Morrison told the ABC’s Sabra Lane that “the suggestion that any way, shape or form with Australia accountable for 1.3% of the world’s emissions, that the individual actions of Australia are impacting directly on specific fire events, whether it’s here or anywhere else in the world, that doesn’t bear up to credible scientific evidence either”.

It’s a line straight out of the climate-change denial playbook.

No one is suggesting if we had a price on carbon there would be fewer bushfires, or it alone would significantly reduce global temperatures, but that does not mean Australia cannot make a difference.

Only on climate change do you ever hear conservatives argue we are powerless. Our economy is only around 1.5% of the world’s total GDP and yet we have no qualms in going to the G20 every year and pushing our agenda.

But on climate change? Sorry, we are impotent.

Except we’re not.

We are the 15th biggest emitter in the world, the biggest on a per capita basis among advanced economies. We have massive power, because we are wealthy enough to show what can be done. If we do nothing, it becomes a strong reason for anyone who emits less than us either in total or per capita to do the same.

And the problem is we are using what power we have to obstruct action on climate change.

Morrison argued that “if anything, Australia is an overachiever on our commitments, on global commitments, and for 2030, we will meet those as well with the mechanisms that we’ve put in place and we’ll ensure we do achieve that”.

What utter tosh.

Our Kyoto commitment is based on the dodgy counting of land use; and our commitment to Paris targets doubles down on that dodginess by using carry-over credits from the Kyoto target – something nations such as the UK are now fighting hard to have removed.

Our target is also well below what scientists say is needed to keep temperature rises below 1.5C.

Thirteen months ago the UN issued a report that concluded we have 12 years to do something to limit climate change, after which it will be too late to keep the rise in temperatures below 1.5C.

The science has not changed in that time; all that has is we now have only 11 years.

But this week it was reported that fossil fuel production by 2030 is set to be double that which is needed to keep temperature rises below 1.5C.

We are failing, and Australia’s own policy is ensuring that failure will continue.

But heck, pointing that out will seem biased, and so the centrist looks for a chance to appear balanced…..

Not all extremism is equal and no force of social or economic change happened due to people refusing to make waves. It happened because people were prepared to go to prison, be attacked, and seek to disrupt those who would go about their lives ignoring the issue.

Centrists love the final vote that sees change occur – where politicians from both sides sit together and agree; they care only in retrospect for the work, suffering and effort over decades that leads to that change.

And they ignore that throughout those decades, the powerful in the media and politics actively prevented change occurring by spending more time calling for calm and reason than noting reality.

And so long as powerful journalists believe that arguments are worthy purely because they call for a middle ground, then ever will they be a force that prevents effective action on climate change.

Read the full article here.

One of the many calls from northern NSW for urgent national climate change action, that the Morrison Government appears determined to ignore

A cry from the heart......

The Sydney Morning Herald, 13 November 2019:

On Friday I lost my beautiful home. I am thankful we are all alive and safe and for the few possessions we were able to salvage. Many others in the small community of Nymboida, near Grafton, where I have grown up, were not even that lucky. They have lost pretty much everything.

I feel numb. It all feels so unreal but the fire was unstoppable. I know the firefighters did everything they could to protect our house and other homes and to them I am extremely grateful.

The fires that joined up and devastated our community were not normal bushfires. For weeks and weeks fires had been burning and community efforts had been unable to get them under control.

Fires burnt for weeks in the regions around Grafton. AAP

But the nightmare really began with the sky changing colour. The blue changed to an orange glow as the fire advanced over the hill. We watched from our veranda as it got progressively darker. It felt like an apocalypse and by 4.30pm it was dark as night. We evacuated from our home on Friday afternoon, following our carefully prepared bushfire action evacuation plan.

I haven’t returned home yet (I still call it home even though it’s gone). The fires are still burning and there is still a huge threat hanging over many places. I and many of my friends don’t want to return home yet; we’re not ready to see the results of the devastation. For many of us, this is where we have lived our entire lives; the only homes we have ever known, filled with memories, have been ravaged by a firestorm that has left only the ghosts of our past.

From what I know more than 45 houses have been lost in Nymboida, it could easily be more. I’ve heard from those who witnessed it that walls of flames 40 or more metres high ravaged the landscape. Catastrophic. 

We are devastated, but we are a strong community, we’ll support each other and get through this together. So many people have been so supportive, kind and helpful; it is incredible, we are so thankful. 

Australia is on fire. The federal government must take urgent action on climate change. Scientists and firefighters have been warning about the consequences of doing nothing for so long. Surely now, with multiple fires burning throughout NSW and Queensland, Scott Morrison must realise that doing nothing is not an option any longer. 

I’m heartbroken at what’s happened but I’m also angry. I’m angry that the government is not adequately addressing the climate crisis. We thank you for your thoughts and prayers Prime Minister, but we need action. 

I am thinking at this moment of everyone in other communities affected by these fires. Please, stay safe. 

Shiann Broderick is an 18-year-old year 12 student.

Quote of the Week

"We mustn’t bring politics into the disastrous situation that was created by ... wait for it ... POLITICS"

First Dog on the Moon writing & drawing in  The Guardian, 13 November 2019

Meme of the Week

@amnf_federal

A record high of 200,000 Newstart recipients only had a partial capacity to work in December 2018 & by June 2019 the figure was higher still

The Guardian, 24 October 2019:

Official government statistics have underreported the number of sick and disabled Newstart recipients by as much as 40% or as many as 80,000 people.

Guardian Australia revealed earlier this year that Newstart recipients with partial capacity to work has reached a record high of 200,000 in December 2018 as people increasingly languish on the unemployment payment, now for an average of three years.

But new data for June 2019, released on Wednesday, provided different figures, showing 284,900 on Newstart had “partial capacity to work” in December 2018.

The figure for June increased to 289,489, of a total of 686,000 people on Newstart. It means 42% of recipients now have an illness or disability that prevents them from working full-time. In September 2014, the figure was 25% using the new figures.

Notes provided in the updated quarterly statistics report confirmed the previous data only included people who had been assessed as having a “partial capacity to work” within the past two years. This is also stated in the previous reports.

But it means sick and disabled people who have been languishing on Newstart for years but had not been reassessed in the past 48 months were excluded from the statistics.

The new statistics are significant because welfare groups have long argued changes to the disability support pension would result in a large number of people languishing on Newstart because they were too sick to work.

“It’s shocking that 40% of people on Newstart have an illness or disability,” said the Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie.

“No one can survive on $40 a day and it’s even tougher if you’re sick or have a disability. It’s heartless and negligent.”……

The Department of Social Services’ Nathan Williamson rejected that the previous data contained “errors”, saying the department had found a “better way, a more fulsome way” to report the statistics.

People with a partial capacity to work are considered not sick or disabled enough to be granted the disability pension as a result of the tightening of disability support pension eligibility. They are assessed as being able to work more than 15 hours a week but less than 30 hours a week.

The Howard government introduced “partial capacity to work” for people on Newstart in a bid to get more people into work and reduce spending on the more generous disability support pension.

On Monday, Guardian Australia revealed that people on Newstart were spending an average of 40% longer on the payment than they were in 2014.

The Dept. of Human Services incorrectly sent out 10,000 "accounts payable notices" and did not inform the welfare recipients of its error

Senior government officials have confirmed 10,000 'robodebt' notices were accidentally sent to welfare recipients in April 2019 when they were meant to remain on hold for review.

Departmental bureaucrats discovered the error within two days and placed the alleged debts on hold.

However, the department did not contact those persons who had received these 10,000 "accounts payable notices".

To date only 200 welfare recipients who received these improper debt notices have contacted the Dept. of Human Services/Centrelink.

That leaves 9,800 current and/or former welfare recipients probably worrying themselves sick over a debt it is highly likely they don't actually owe. Readers can listen to the short ABC report here:

https://abcmedia.akamaized.net/radio/local_sydney/audio/201910/pam-2019-10-25-robodebt-estimates.mp3

In addition to this error, in seeking recovery of money allegedly owed by welfare recipients Centrelink deliberately sent out debt notices to 169 welfare recipients who were already dead, while it also approached representatives of “deceased customers” in 515 cases.

According to The Guardian on 25 October 2019, in a recent Senate Estimates hearing the Department of Human Services has also not ruled out targeting age pensioners and other vulnerable people as part of the controversial robodebt scheme, saying any decision to expand the scheme in order to meet budget targets would be made “further down the track”.

On 3 October 2019 the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) informed the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into Centrelink's compliance program that:

ACOSS has held deep concerns about Centrelink's compliance program, otherwise known as robo-debt—which I will refer to here mostly in that way—since its inception. Despite some improvements to the implementation of the program, two fundamental design flaws remain inherent. One is the use of the averaging of ATO-reported annual income over the period someone has received income support, which is leading to incorrect calculations of overpayments. The other is the reversal of the onus of proof, which requires people to disprove alleged debts on the basis of very limited information. Under the current system, an individual's earnings data is matched with ATO data through an automated process. Where a discrepancy is identified, an individual is invited to confirm or update their income. This may go back some years and be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for people to obtain the necessary information from previous employers. Where they don't provide the relevant information, the department uses averaged ATO data as a default. The department does this in full knowledge that's it's unlikely to produce an accurate or fair outcome, which its own debt recovery guidelines indeed warn. 

At present, there is a lack of transparency about the proportion and the number of debts raised as a result of ATO averaging processes, so we urge the committee, as part of this hearing, to seek information from the department for public release to inform this inquiry and the broader public debate about the policy. The robo-debt scheme also shifts the work of verifying income onto individuals, work that used to be done by the department, as well as shifting the onus of proof. As such, individuals are required to obtain historic payslips, bank statements and other records going back up to six years. If they are unable to do so, they risk incurring a debt erroneously. We note that Centrelink's previous guidelines advised people to keep employment records for six months, in stark contrast to the six-year period over which robo-debt ranges. This is deeply unfair. 

In addition to these fundamental design flaws, we hold concerns about the role of third party private companies in the compliance system, both as frontline staff in private service centres and in private debt collection agencies. We understand that to date one in three robo-debts have been sent to debt collectors. Direct engagement with people, often on low incomes and facing a range of life stresses, about their financial situation requires sensitivity and technical expertise. It's not appropriate for these functions to be outsourced to private operators who sit outside Centrelink, while Centrelink itself remains grossly understaffed. 

There are a range of other factors that compound unfairness of the current system. The first is that the government has extraordinary powers to enforce the debt owing to it, including to ban people from travelling internationally to garnish their tax returns and to charge interest on debt load. The automatic imposition of a debt recovery fee on debts prior to June 2017 adds further insult to injury for people affected. There is higher rate of erroneous debts calculated through the flawed data-matching algorithm, many of which will not be challenged and so we have no way of knowing, in fact, how many are in error, and the higher cost of administering the program at a time when our government says it doesn't have funds available to address other urgent priorities in social security systems. 

Finally, we'd like to remind the committee of the human impacts of this policy. Around a million income discrepancy notices have been issued since 2015 and half a million alleged it. And while every person's situation is different and not everybody is in a vulnerable situation, we know these notices have caused deep distress and anxiety for many people who've received them. Despite some exemptions, we know that they have been sent to people with mental health problems, people who've experienced trauma, people recently bereaved, people who are currently living on very low payments, people who are in financial hardship and people who are homeless. We also know that the impact has been devastating for many of those people, and they are very concerned at reports that the government might seek to narrow the range of available exemptions. We urge the committee to ensure that they hear from people directly affected by this scheme in the course of these hearings, including as witnesses. 

In closing, improvements to the implementation of the scheme, which we do acknowledge have not cured the fundamental design flaws at its heart, continue to cause great harm and distress. We urge the committee, therefore, to recommend suspension of the program and its replacement by a more transparent, fair, accurate and humane system of debt recovery

The hidden costs for rural & regional older Australians when accessing Home Care packages

There are a number of people in the Clarence Valley who are hesitant to apply for Home Care packages - often because the houshold budget maths just don't add up when it comes to what is now essentially privatised and very expensive assistance for older people in their own home.

Here is yet another example......

The Daily Examiner, 21 October 2019, p.3:

Clarence Community Transport CEO Warwick Foster said there were misconceptions surrounding how government funding works with Commonwealth Home Support, NDIS and Home Care Package clients.

“People don’t have the correct information about how the system actually works, and that’s understandable because it’s a confusing system,” he said.

Mr Foster said Clarence Community Transport was primarily a home support program, designed to provide subsidised transport to eligible clients.

“When it comes to clients who transition to a Home Care Package, regardless of the level, then they technically become ineligible to access Commonwealth Home Support Programme services,” he said.

“I think where the problem comes in is that there’s not enough education for the clients about what it means when they accept a Home Care Package.

“Unfortunately clients who had been using community transport to get to appointments go from paying one fee then having to pay another fee because we’re no longer able to provide subsidised transport. That’s why it’s such a shock.

“Three days a week we transport clients to Brisbane and the Gold Coast, and to get them up and back for a subsidised client is $80, but that fee goes up to $780 once someone accesses a Home Care Package.

“We get notified by the government, who tell us when a client is in receipt of a Home Care Package, that they’re no longer eligible for CHSP services.”.....

“We’re a not-for-profit but that doesn’t mean we’re here to provide free transport.

“We are required under our contracts to recoup some costs of the transport service from our clients.”

Cartoons of the Week

Mark David

@cathywilcox1

Seems Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison's personal war on the poor and vulnerable may have its roots in the right-wing American culture he so admires

Stricter eligibility requirements when applying for Centrelink benefits, allowances and pensions. Reducing the scope of human intervention in decision making. Automated assessment of ongoing eligibility. Automatic suspension of cash transfers.

Sound familiar? Well it seems that the U.S.A. refined applying punitive measures to the poor and vulnerable long before Australia's right-wing warriors in the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government began their all out class war.

American began limiting eligibility and applying algorithms in the 1970s and 1980s. 

The Guardian, 14 October 2019: 

All around the world, from small-town Illinois in the US to Rochdale in England, from Perth, Australia, to Dumka in northern India, a revolution is under way in how governments treat the poor. 

You can’t see it happening, and may have heard nothing about it. It’s being planned by engineers and coders behind closed doors, in secure government locations far from public view. 

Only mathematicians and computer scientists fully understand the sea change, powered as it is by artificial intelligence (AI), predictive algorithms, risk modeling and biometrics. But if you are one of the millions of vulnerable people at the receiving end of the radical reshaping of welfare benefits, you know it is real and that its consequences can be serious – even deadly. 

The Guardian has spent the past three months investigating how billions are being poured into AI innovations that are explosively recasting how low-income people interact with the state. Together, our reporters in the US, Britain, India and Australia have explored what amounts to the birth of the digital welfare state. 

Their dispatches reveal how unemployment benefits, child support, housing and food subsidies and much more are being scrambled online. Vast sums are being spent by governments across the industrialized and developing worlds on automating poverty and in the process, turning the needs of vulnerable citizens into numbers, replacing the judgment of human caseworkers with the cold, bloodless decision-making of machines. 

At its most forbidding, Guardian reporters paint a picture of a 21st-century Dickensian dystopia that is taking shape with breakneck speed. The American political scientist Virginia Eubanks has a phrase for it: “The digital poorhouse.” 

As one recipient described it: “You owe what you have eaten.” 

In the UK, we investigate the secure government site outside Newcastle where millions are being spent developing a new generation of welfare robots to replace humans. Private companies including a New York outfit led by the world’s first bot billionaire, are supercharging a process which has spawned a whole new jargon: “virtual workforce”, “augmented decision-making”, “robot process automation”. 

The government is rushing forward with its digital mission despite the pain already being inflicted on millions of low-income Britons by the country’s “digital by default” agenda. Claimants spoke of the hunger, filth, fear and panic that they are enduring.

In Australia, where the Guardian has reported extensively on robodebt, the scheme that has been accused of wrongly clawing back historic debts through a flawed algorithm, we now disclose that the government has opened a new digital front: using automation to suspend millions of welfare payments. Recipients are finding their money cut off without notice.

Read the full article here.

It is not hard to draw a line between Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison's admiration for all things Republican and religiously conservative in America and his apparent desire to place all welfare recipients on the Indue Limited cashless debit card before the next federal election in 2022.

Scott Morrison's war on the poor is being expanded under the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management to Cashless Debit Card Transition) Bill 2019 which is currently before the Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs which will report to the Australian Parliament on 7 November 2019.

To date no welfare recipients have made submissions to the Senate standing committee on this bill. I suspect that this is due in large measure to the fact that Centrelink in particular has released personal information about welfare recipients who have gone public in the past and, there is anecdotal information that certain recipients who have spoken out publicly about life on the cashless welfare card have been sanctioned in some manner.

Quote of the Week

"Also last week, Social Services Minister Anne Ruston made the extraordinary claim that raising the Newstart payment would only benefit drug dealers and publicans. The denigration of the poor by the Morrison Government and its supporters shows no sign of easing. Indeed, this past week indicates an escalation in Government propaganda, designed to provoke increasing public hostility and resentment towards the most vulnerable people in our society. There are powerful people both in and outside of government, with platforms provided by various media, whose goal is to humiliate, denigrate and destroy others on the sole basis that they are receiving Newstart."  [Jennifer Wilson writing in Independent Australia, 4 October 2019]

Federal Liberal MPs dislike people calling a spade a spade

~~~~~~~~~~

"If the government actually though that calling it robodebt caused more anxiety, they'd have named it that themselves"  [@RichardAOB, 4 October 2019]

~~~~~~~~~~

The Guardian, 4 October 2019:

The Coalition’s controversial debt recovery scheme should not be called robodebt, Liberal MPs say, in part because the phrase is causing anxiety in the community.

A day after the Liberal senator Matt O’Sullivan told the first hearing of a Senate inquiry into the scheme “robodebt” was a “misnomer”, his colleague, Hollie Hughes, admonished representatives from Western Australia’s community legal centres for using the term.

Hughes also told the inquiry on Friday the term robodebt was “a bit of a misnomer, particularly under the current system”.

“And I think using that term is probably creating a bit more anxiety than is required,” Hughes said. “If we’re trying to reduce the anxiety around this, probably not using that term particularly in these sorts of settings would be helpful.”

Despite noting improvements to the program, including increased involvement from Centrelink staff and outreach to affected welfare recipients, the WA legal centres said on Friday that the scheme was still having an adverse impact on vulnerable people.

~~~~~~~~~~

"I actually agree with the politicians saying that ‘robodebt’ is a misnomer... it implies there was actually a debt in the first instance. Maybe ‘robotheft’, ‘robowehatepoorpeople’ or ‘robofuckyou’ would be more appropriate?”  [@LukeLPearson, 4 October 2019]

~~~~~~~~~~

Scott Morrison & Co exceed their previous level of destructive behaviour in the face of climate change

David Rowe, 14 September 2019

By the early hours of Tuesday 24 September 2019 coal-burning power stations in eastern Australian mainland states had released over 99 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions into the air this year alone.

Sadly, this comes as no surprise as total all-sector emissions have been steadily rising since the 2013 federal election. Until by September 2016 they had reached 527.2Mt of CO2-e, by September 2017 533.3Mt of CO2-e, by March 2018 535.8Mt of CO2-e, by September 2018 536Mt of CO2-e and by end of March 2019 national greenhouse gas emissions stood at 538.9Mt of CO2-e.

Yet the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government is still continuing to carve a destructive path towards increasing the impacts of climate change for every person living in Australia.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 September 2019, excerpt:

As delegates of the United Nations climate change summit - which Mr Morrison has snubbed - prepare to discuss emission reduction efforts this week, briefing notes obtained under Freedom of Information laws detail the emphasis placed on coal in the government's diplomatic relations.

Departmental briefing notes provided to Resources Minister Matt Canavan ahead of his official visit to Singapore and India last month canvass the potential to expand Australia's coal exports into Bangladesh - a nation that is among the most vulnerable to the effects of global warning.

The government is seeking to grow its coal exports in overseas markets as it looks to buttress the economic fallout from a deteriorating relationship with China.

Australian Conservation Foundation climate change campaigner Christian Slattery said Australia was "trashing its international reputation because of its addiction to polluting coal''.

“As major importers of Australian coal move to transition to cleaner forms of energy, the Morrison government is doing the coal industry’s bidding, trying to secure new markets," Mr Slattery said.....

Foreign Minister Marise Payne will front the UN climate change summit this week, but will not address delegates - as Australia is among a group of coal-supporting economies singled out as not getting a spot on the list of 63 speakers.

Mr Morrison's snub comes despite him being in the United States on an official visit.

In an email to the Prime Minister ahead of his official visit to Vietnam last month, bureaucrats advise him to push hard for an expansion of Australia's coal exports to the nation, which represented a "growth market".

"We strongly recommend a focus on coal exports to Vietnam as part of the Prime Minister’s planned visit," the email said.

"There is potential for growth in exports to Vietnam to partially mitigate declining exports elsewhere, notably China."

The briefing said coal exports from Australia to Vietnam had more than doubled since the 2017-18 financial year, up from 4,286,390 tonnes or approximately $750 million in value.

A spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said in a statement that the government "promotes all of Australian energy exports in our trade discussions - coal, gas and renewables".

"These exports underpin the Australian economy, delivering billions in revenue to support essential services and support thousands of jobs in regional Australia."

ACF's Mr Slattery said the government "seems intent on selling a 20th century technology to a 21st century world and doing a great deal more climate damage while they are at it".

“Australia’s reported blocking by the UN Secretary-General from speaking at the special climate summit in New York is nothing short of an international embarrassment for a wealthy and developed country that prides itself on being a good international citizen," he said.

At last, a class action to be mounted against Morrison Government's error-prone 'robodebt'

If any of the following applies to you and you are considering joining this class action challenge on behalf of Centrelink clients who were served with a debt notice, the following are first contact details for the law firm which may act for you if you are eligible:

Gordon Legal
Ph: 1300 55 50 16

Informaton at https://gordonlegal.com.au/robodebt-class-action/ Online contact form at https://gordonlegal.com.au/contact

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Guardian, 17 September 2019:

Gordon Legal has put out its official statement on the class action: 

"The law firm will challenge, on behalf of affected persons, the government’s use of a flawed calculation system by Centrelink to unlawfully take back tens of millions of dollars from many thousands of Centrelink recipients, including pensioners. 

The money for pensioners, carers, widows, students, farmers and unemployed people was taken from them due to a one-size-fits-all online compliance system. 

The robodebt scheme has been in place since mid-2016, its legality was first raised with us by the new shadow minister for government services, Bill Shorten. 

The basis for the challenge is that that the federal government financially benefited when it wrongfully took and banked money that legitimately belonged to recipients. 

Gordon Legal Senior Partner Peter Gordon says ‘investigations reveal between two to three hundred million dollars have been wrongly taken from people, and making it even worse was many were hit with penalties of 10% on those amounts.’ 

‘These people are the least able groups to afford the heavy-handed actions which are based on a system that used ATO averages that didn’t take into account individual circumstances.’ 

‘The unfair and incorrect assumptions had a devastating financial impact on people’s lives. The emotional distress for people who have done nothing wrong has been high.’ 

‘The robodebt system put debt collectors onto innocent people to chase unlawful debts.’ 

‘They have been unfairly financially disadvantaged and must be repaid with interest, penalties dropped and damages paid.’ 

‘The amounts owed will vary from case to case but the average repayments could be a few thousand dollars which is vital from a financial and wellbeing perspective for these people who are least able to afford it.’

Peter Gordon says ‘The people in this class action were not gaming the system. They had honest claims to payments and allowances that Robodebt wrongly assessed, penalised and pursued with harsh consequences.’ 

‘If you have been unfairly affected by Robodebt, you should register your details on the Gordon Legal website and we will be in touch.’ 

Gordon Legal considers a class action is likely to be the best way to deliver redress for people unfairly impacted by Robodebt." [my yellow highlighting]

Peter Gordon: 

"The class action element of the claim is reasonably straightforward. What is innovative about this is to bring a claim against the government for damages for unjust enrichment that will require the high court to recognise legal principles, which I hardly recognised in other common law countries, particularly the United Kingdom. It may break new ground. We think there … is a strong legal basis for it. 

In order for a class action to proceed, either in a state court or the federal jurisdiction, you need to demonstrate that there appear to be several more people who have claims with similar or the same common issues in the fact of law, and there are clearly a large number of people who have similar issues of fact and of law. 

So the question of its status as a class action is not particularly controversial. Under class-action law, not every case needs to be exactly the same. They only have to be roughly similar. Not every case needs to be bound to succeed. You simply need to demonstrate that there are cases that have similar issues that the court can resolve for the benefit of everybody. 

Everyone who believes they are aggrieved is entitled to bring their own actions, whether they are in the ART or as appropriately advised. We are working with the legal aid agencies, but it doesn’t take, I think, a lot of consideration of what has happened to understand that if a template approach has been applied across 800,000 people, and there are admittedly, on the part of the government, 150,000 errors that have been made, that’s a very large number of mistakes which have been made. If they’ve been made, there is a limit to the ability of any court system and indeed bureaucracy to take them off one by one. 

We think it’s appropriate that if there are common issues that have been got wrong by the Commonwealth, that they be addressed in a way that gives everyone release, not just those who are able to access lawyers and legal aid or have the wherewithal all the records to be able to do it themselves."

Bill Shorten: 

" Let’s be clear, we’ve asked the government to fix this, but they’ve got it wrong. If the government through parliament won’t fix the problem, I think giving justice to victims through class action is a legitimate political approach to take. 

Question: Should the program then in your view be suspended while this class action is even being looked at? 

That would be smart for them to suspend it. The question you have to ask is why is the government looking at a blanket scheme looking at annual wages data against people getting fortnightly payments? 

They are hoping they can shake down people into paying up. This is a government building their government position based on this faulty, immoral and quite possibly illegal scheme, but they should suspend it and rule out extending it to anyone else, and in fact they should revisit their own files and perhaps sit down and work out why this is wrong and stop it. 

The government keeps reaching for blaming Labor pre-2013. Robodebt, this online compliance system, was introduced by the current government. 

The current government announced compliance campaigns in 2015, 2016, and they started introducing robodebt, their use of an algorithm to data match. 

It was born under this government and the pathology of robodebt is sick, it has caused countless harm. I give a shoutout to the media, you’ve all covered the problems of robodebt, but at what point in Australia do you say once you’ve seen individual case after individual case it is called a pattern, and the pattern shows robodebt is immoral itself. 

What we and Gordon Legal is going to do is testing the legal foundations of robodebt, because my own research in the last couple of months has led me to believe it is almost certainly illegal and I just have to do research through the stories you’ve covered to say there is a sickness at the heart of robodebt which needs to be cured."