Administrative Appeals Tribunal became so bloated by Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government appointees that Liberal Party cronyism began to eat away at its reputation. It is to be abolished and a new tribunal created in 2023

ABC News, 16 December 2022:

One of the most notoriously politicised bodies, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, will be abolished after the attorney-general declared its reputation had been irreversibly damaged.

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said the former government made dozens of politicised appointments to the AAT in its time in office, and that he would end the "cronyism".

"By appointing 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close Liberal associates, without any merit-based selection process … the former government fatally compromised the AAT," Mr Dreyfus said.

"Australians rightly expect honesty, integrity and accountability in government."

A new review body will be established in the new year, and already-appointed tribunal members will be invited to continue with it.

For almost 50 years the AAT was tasked with reviewing the decisions of government, including on matters of taxation, immigration and social security.

Appointments to the AAT were made by the government of the day for terms of up to seven years, though members could be re-appointed.

Mr Dreyfus said the new body would have a merit-based process for appointing tribunal members, after he accused the former government of sometimes appointing members to review issues such as taxation despite having no expertise in the area.

"The AAT's dysfunction has had a very real cost to the tens of thousands of people who rely on the AAT each year to independently review government decisions that have major and sometimes life-changing impacts on their lives," Mr Dreyfus said.

"Decisions such as whether an older Australian receives an age pension, whether a veteran is compensated for a service injury or whether a participant in the NDIS receives funding for an essential report."….

Accusations of politicised appointments have been levelled at former governments of all stripes, though progressive think tank The Australia Institute found a significant rise in what it deemed political appointments after the Coalition won office in 2013.

The think tank found around 5 per cent of AAT appointments under the Howard, Rudd and Gillard governments had been made to people with political connections, but that jumped to more than one-third of appointments under the Morrison government.

It also found a quarter of senior AAT members who were political appointments had no legal qualifications.

Plum jobs that paid as much as $500,000 were sometimes offered to people in the dying days of government before a federal election.

Former NSW state Liberal minister Pru Goward, former WA Liberal minister Michael Mischin, and Mr Morrison's former chief of staff Anne Duffield were among those appointed to the AAT in the final days of the Morrison government.

The AAT had also faced several accusations of bullying by its members since 2016.

Bill Browne, The Australia Institute's democracy and accountability director, said reform was urgently needed.

"Whatever body replaces the AAT must be robust and independent, and that means the AAT’s replacement must be carefully designed with an open and transparent appointment process that ensures only qualified, independent members are appointed," Mr Browne said.

Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesman Greg Barns SC welcomed the AAT's abolition.

"Mr Dreyfus has the chance to create a new, impartial and fully independent tribunal that deals with thousands of cases each year involving Centrelink issues, tax issues and military compensation, to name some of the areas," he said.

"Today is a win for the rule of law."

Justice Susan Kenney has been appointed as the acting president of the AAT to guide its transition to the new system.

Mr Dreyfus said the new review body would be given 75 additional staff to help clear backlogs, at a cost of $63.4 million.

He said legislation to establish the body would be introduced next year, though likely not until the second half of the year.

BACKGROUND

ABC News, 7 November 2022:

Administrative Appeals Tribunal reveals 17 members have faced bullying or harassment complaints since 2016

Seventeen current members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) have had more than one bullying, harassment or discrimination complaint made against them since 2016.

Allegations have been made against 19 members in total, with two members no longer working with the AAT.

They include senior officials and a deputy president, with the head of the tribunal unaware until Monday that they were still serving despite the multiple complaints.

The Klaxon, 3 September 2022:

AAT member paid for two gov’t jobs – for over five years

The top public official responsible for penalising medical practitioners who rip-off Medicare was paid for two Federal Government jobs for her entire five-and-a-half-year tenure.

The Klaxon can exclusively reveal Professor Julie Quinlivan, the long-time head of the Federal Government’s Professional Services Review agency, was also paid as a member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Quinlivan has been employed as a “part-time member” of the Federal Government’s Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) – in a position paying tens of thousands of dollars a year – since July 2015.

She was also employed as the full-time “director” of the Professional Services Review (PSR) agency from February 2017 until six weeks ago, when she quietly departed, seven months before her contract was due to expire.

The director of the PSR is responsible for reviewing allegations of “inappropriate practice” against Medicare by medical practitioners – including double-billing – and is paid almost $400,000 a year.

The payments to Quinlivan while she held both the AAT and PSR positions totalled over $2 million.

ABC NEWS, 14 April 2022; 

Government unnecessarily extends jobs ahead of election

Plum jobs worth up to $500,000 a year were extended to Liberal Party-linked individuals by the Morrison government in the lead-up to the election, and many were not due to end for another two years. Some had their tenure extended by Morrison & Co to 2027.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 1 February 2019:

Morrison government moves to re-appoint Abbott-era AAT members

The Morrison government is moving to re-appoint dozens of Abbott-era Administrative Appeals Tribunal members despite their terms coming to an end six weeks after a May federal election.

Crikey, 27 November 2019:

AAT accused of ‘intimidating’ robo-debt victims out of appealing

In the last financial year, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal contacted almost 800 people who wanted to appeal their Centrelink debt. Around half of those contacted withdrew their appeal, a figure that has alarmed experts.

Crikey, 25 September 2019:

Members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal are steadily losing their jobs and being replaced with people less qualified.

Terry Carney lost his job as a member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) via a short, blunt email. It arrived five months after he delivered a tribunal decision which declared Centrelink’s robo-debt scheme to be illegal — a finding that angered the federal government.

The fate of Banyam Baigham-the Sleeping Lizard (North Lismore Plateau) remains unresolved

 

An artist's impression of the 'Sleeping Lizard' goanna that forms the hills of North Lismore Plateau site.(Facebook: North Lismore Plateau Protection Group) - ABC News, 10 February 2022

ABC Premium News, 16 December 2022:

....Panel chair Paul Mitchell told a determination meeting that virtually every aspect of the $39 million housing proposal needed further work but he had not ruled out future development on the site.....

The development of the site has been discussed for many years, with Aboriginal heritage & biodiversity listed as the greatest concerns.

Developers urged to submit again

Lismore City Council general manager John Walker said there was support for flood-free housing on the plateau.

"It's disappointing because we do need land, but any approval for DA (development application) must be fully compliant," Mr Walker said.

"You can't expect councils & planning authorities to approve matters without the necessary studies & reviews."

A report from the independent flood inquiry recommended urgently moving people out of high-risk areas on flood plains.

Mr Walker has urged the developers to submit a new application.

"We would certainly encourage them to do so, the plateau was a really important part of the future of Lismore. We'd encourage them to work with us to get that development happening," he said.

Consultants speaking on behalf of the developer told the panel they will now consider starting proceedings in the Land & Environment Court.

ABC News-ABC North Coast, 16 December 2022:

Panel chair Paul Mitchell told a determination meeting that virtually every aspect of the $39 million housing proposal needed further work but he had not ruled out future development on the site.

"I'm sure we'll see some residential development on the plateau," he said.

"The issues are not insurmountable, but this development application wasn't complete in the sense that it didn't answer key questions, such as whether landslip issues could be managed."

Lismore City Council had previously supported development on the plateau but in a submission to the panel recommended the project be refused.

Northern Star, 16 December 2022:

Finding significant and unresolved issues with the development application, the planning panel unanimously voted down the $39 million housing development on Dunoon Rd in North Lismore on Thursday…..

Lismore ratepayer Dot Moller said a new nuanced plan for the development of the North Lismore plateau may be required.

“There is a potential injustice to the population of North Lismore, our community badly affected by the devastating floods this year.

“Many families are still homeless and living in substandard conditions right at the foot of our green plateau.

“Folks have left as they‘ve been unable to find work or repair their homes. Social and affordable housing is desperately needed.

“It is time to think about what we really need – not what a big Sydney development company thinks will work for them.”

Lismore resident Helen Robinson pointed out to the panel some of the land on the proposed estate had been identified as suitable to relocate up to 500 homes off the flood plain in North Lismore by the Northern Rivers Reconstruction Corporation.

“Those homes are suitable to move to the foothills of this estate where the people can maintain their communities,” she said.

“(But) council maintains that it's not in the community’s interest. I wonder which part of the community they’re considering.

“I don’t think they’re considering the people of the flood plain.”

Major concerns that sank the development included, environmental and wildlife impacts from land clearing, bushfire hazards, pollution of drinking water, increased stormwater run-off, noise from traffic and undue pressure on infrastructure.

But the elephant in the room – and the biggest obstacle facing the developers – is the outstanding Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment.

“A significant shortfall with the application is a lack of consolation and documentation in regards to Aboriginal cultural heritage,” the council’s assessment reads.

The plan to build on the Northern Plateau has been banging around for over a decade, with the development hotly debated.

The council’s assessment found the DA as presented was in contravention of Aboriginal heritage conservation.

Known culturally as the ‘Sleeping Lizard’ because of the shape of the land, the site is said to hold significant cultural value to Widjabul Wia-bal traditional owners of the Bundjalung Nation.

Back in 2011, members of the Widjabul Wia-bal community protested after the council voted to allow the development because of the cultural significance of the site.

More than 10 years later, the issue of heritage conservation on the site is yet to be addressed by the prospective developers, the Northern Regional Planning Panel heard.

Tony Hart and Clyde Treadwell, consultants who represented land owners trying to develop the land, acknowledged the issues. They asked for a six-month extension for “specialist consultants” to resolve the problems.

Frustrated panel chair Paul Mitchell said: “The problem with that is that the application shouldn't have been lodged in the first place.”

“Every aspect of this application that needs further work … virtually none of the fundamental issues have been finally resolved.”

Mr Hart and Treadwell told the panel landowners would proceed to take Lismore City Council to the Land and Environment Court for a determination if the extension and DA was refused.

“We do not want to go to court but we will have to if there is no other avenue,” Mr Hart said.

Mr Mitchell said that would be “unfortunate” because it would be “an expensive burden” on Lismore residents.

BACKGROUND

NORTH COAST VOICES, Sunday, 11 December 2022:

Given the NSW Northern Regional Council is in the pocket of the Perrottet Government and that state government has passed law which allows it to facilitate landgrabs by professional property speculators, this matter is not going to end well for Lismore

Sleeping Lizard
IMAGE: displayed on change.org

Elon Musk no longer the richest man in the world - seems to be finding it extremely difficult to herd cats

 

Elon Musk has disclosed that he had sold another $3.6 billion worth of Tesla stock. Credit...Matt Rourke/Associated Press. The New York Times, 15 December 2022.

The Saturday Paper, from the pen of the emails editor, 16 December 2022:

Musk loses $100bn in a year

What we know:

• Musk’s net worth has fallen below that of France’s Bernard Arnault, chairman and CEO of luxury goods maker LVMH (CBS);

• His wealth has dropped by more than $US100bn this year, more than the GDP of Bulgaria, Croatia, Iceland and Uruguay;

• Musk this week sold about $US3.6bn in Tesla shares, despite declaring earlier in the year he had no further plans to sell shares (CNBC);

• It comes as he takes legal action against the holder of a Twitter account that tracks his private jet, and suspends the user, a month after declaring he would allow it to keep running (BBC);

• Musk has meanwhile allowed a host of contentious fringe figures to rejoin Twitter, apparently including anti-vaxxer Pete Evans (Crikey);

• As advertisers flee the platform and revenue crumbles, Twitter has reportedly stopped paying rent on offices and is considering not paying severance packages to former employees (New York Times);

• Musk has sacked more than half of Twitter’s workforce, including reps who oversaw relationships with advertisers, staff in charge of complying with regulations, and a team devoted to enterprise products that brought in hundreds of millions a year (Bloomberg);

• Musk’s vast borrowing to overpay for the acquisition means he faces $US1.2bn a year in interest payments, at a variable rate, with the first cheque due to the banks at the end of January;…..

The Guardian, 16 December 2022:

A number of prominent journalists who have reported on Twitter and its new chief executive, Elon Musk, appear to have been suspended or banned from the platform.

In a series of evening tweets, Musk wrote that sharing his real-time location on Twitter was forbidden, and accused journalists who he alleged had been sharing information about his location of posting “assassination coordinates”.

Accounts of tech journalists at CNN, the Washington Post, Mashable and the New York Times were suspended in quick succession on Thursday evening. All had recently published articles about Musk’s suspension of a Twitter account that had shared publicly available data about the movements of his private jet. Each of these articles had highlighted the tension between Musk’s stated commitment to “free speech” and his choice to ban an account that he personally disliked.

The Twitter account for rival social media company, Mastodon – which some Twitter users have migrated to after Musk’s takeover of Twitter – also appeared to have been suspended.

Links to individual Mastodon accounts also appeared to be banned. An error message notified some users that links to Mastodon had been “identified” as “potentially harmful” by Twitter or its partners.

Ryan Mac, a New York Times tech reporter, wrote on a new Twitter account that he was given “no warning” before his account was suspended and that he had received no communication from the company about the reason his account was “permanently suspended”…..

Read the full article here.

Musk or one or more of his companies appear to have been involved in an impressive amount of litigation, according to Wikipedia and, on 16 December Bloomberg Law reported:

Twitter Inc. has parted ways with Regina Lima, its former head of international legal and sole remaining deputy general counsel, as Elon Musk continues to overhaul the embattled social media company.

Lima’s departure—confirmed by four sources familiar with Twitter’s operations—comes as the company nears the two-month mark of Musk’s turbulent takeover.

Lima didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. She was based in Miami before being summoned to Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters last week.

Most of Twitter’s roughly 200-employee legal staff has either been laid off, resigned, or otherwise departed during that time. The reductions in force come as the company copes with a variety of legal and regulatory entanglements.....

What became apparent during the course of his evidence is that as a then Minister for Social Services, later Treasurer and finally Prime Minister the Liberal MP for Cook believed he had powers not found in federal legislation

 

In which the Liberal MP for Cook and former Australian Minister Scott John Morrison decides that social security law and in particular the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 is open to interpretation, incorrectly cites the numbering of sections and subsection of this Act and assumes that a degree in applied economic geography gained in the 1980s allows him sufficient understanding of law to school a Royal Commissioner....

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE ROBODEBT SCHEME, official transcript, 14.12.2022, P.1816-P.1819, excerpt:

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because the advice that we received was there had been overpayment to the extent of around 3.6 per cent of the annual payments.

COMMISSIONER: I'm asking - you said you were familiar with the Act. I'm just wondering what you identified as the provision which would entitle you to ask people who hadn't been on about benefit for some period questions -

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, the Department has - under the Act has an ability to raise debts. I don't think there's any dispute about that.

COMMISSIONER: That's not the question. On what basis were they to be asked for information using this online system as to their income?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because -

COMMISSIONER: Because the idea was that they would be asked to confirm what the ATO said.

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, they were asked to clarify what their income was at the time based on the fact that there was an identified irregularity between what their annual income was. And the process was built to seek to engage - this is my understanding.

COMMISSIONER: Sure.

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: The great frustration, as was explained to me, was the Department of Human Services had in engaging with individuals.

COMMISSIONER: Alright. Now, look, that's not my question. You said you were familiar with the Act. I'm asking you what you understood to be the legal basis for understanding how someone who may not have been on benefit for six months or three years or whatever to confirm or deny ATO data. Did you -

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because the Department, under the Act, has an ability to raise debts in relation to previous overpayments.

COMMISSIONER: That's a different issue from what they can ask people to do, you will appreciate.

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, no, I would say that in relation to the identification of a debt, then it's not unreasonable for the Secretary to seek information as to whether they were kept appraised of the beneficiary's income at the time.

COMMISSIONER: It mightn't be unreasonable, but is it legal?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Yes, it is.

COMMISSIONER: Okay. And pursuant to what, in your understanding?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, under section 63, the Secretary may require a person to attend the Department.

COMMISSIONER: I'm sorry to do this to you, Mr Greggery.

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: And under section 192, they have the power to obtain information.

COMMISSIONER: Mr Morrison, this is your reading of the Act, or you had some advice about this?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, it's my plain English understanding of it.

COMMISSIONER: I see. Alright. Now, section 63 applies to a person who is receiving or has made a claim for social security payment, you appreciate?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Yes.

COMMISSIONER: Not somebody who in the past has received it?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, that is a matter open to interpretation.

COMMISSIONER: Well, yes. Section -

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: I think it is 65A.

COMMISSIONER: 65A?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Is that the section?

COMMISSIONER: Have you got them there with you?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: No.

COMMISSIONER: Alright. So - are you doing this from memory, or have you got a record of some sort?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: I've just noted the sections.

COMMISSIONER: Okay. You see, the position in relation to somebody who has been on benefit in the past but is no longer, is that you can go back 13 weeks under section 69 - 13 weeks prior. And that was not going to be this position, was it?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: No. And in relation to the matters that were raised in the Executive Minute, they were non-specific as to what issues required legislative change or policy change. There's - generally there may be a need to do that. So -

COMMISSIONER: But you seem to have been quite familiar with the legislation. So why were you not interested in what legislative change was required? Because you must have wondered, didn't you, about the power to do these things?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Well, not at that point because it was still a proposal under development. Now, had it reached a point where it said that legislation was required, then I would have expected to see all of that, of course, and then would have made judgments about whether that would have been proceeded with. And in all likelihood, then I suspect it would not have.

COMMISSIONER: Look, if you were so familiar with the Act, you ought to have been concerned about whether the Act was being complied with in the development of this proposal to the New Policy Proposal point. How is that you were content to just see "no legislation required" and leave it at that?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because, Commissioner, that is how the Cabinet process works. I had been a member of Cabinet for a long time. And the way the Cabinet process works is it has the in-built disciplines across The Public Service to fully interrogate these matters to enable what is put forward to Ministers, who are dealing with multiple submissions - in this submission alone, there were 51 New Policy Proposals.

COMMISSIONER: Yes.

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Multiple submissions. And it is part of the process for these matters to be interrogated. Now, in the Executive Minute I received, it said - it noted there are issues. That is not uncommon. I have seen that many times in the early stages.

COMMISSIONER: And then that vanished. So why were you content with that? That vanished. You were familiar with the Act. Why didn't you want to know how it was that legislative change wouldn't be required for this proposal to go back some years?

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because I was satisfied that the Department had done their job. I had great respect for the Department and for their professionalism and for their knowledge of these issues, and - and I would never have conceived that had there been legal advice suggesting this was unlawful - it had never entered my imagination that that would not be raised with Ministers.

COMMISSIONER: Okay. But you have a Minute that says legislative change is required, and it's your own Department that's saying that. Then you get a New Policy Proposal that says legislative change is not required. Why don't you ask your own Department, "So how does that happen?”

THE HON. SCOTT MORRISON MP: Because I didn't see it as necessary, because they had - they had affirmed it so strongly and that I had great faith in the Department to work through the matters that they were working through…... 

NOTES

1) Mr. Morrison refers the Commissioner to "sec 63, the Secretary may require a person to attend the Department" then narrows it down further to "I think it is 65A". There is no 65A in the Act. There is a "61A Deduction at request of recipient--other payments" provisions, "63A Proof of life certificate" provisions and "66A General requirement to inform of a change of circumstances etc." provisions. Perhaps Mr. Morrison meant to cite "66A". However that section does not deal with persons who are no longer receiving benefits and it was his understanding of the time limit provisions in "SECT 69 Person who has received a social security payment or who has held a concession card" that the Commissioner was querying. 

2) Despite details of the 11 June 2021 judgment of the Federal Court of Australia found in Prygodicz v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) - Summary — "In the course of the proceeding the Commonwealth admitted that it did not have a proper legal basis to raise, demand or recover asserted debts which were based on income averaging from ATO data. The evidence shows that the Commonwealth unlawfully asserted such debts, totalling at least $1.763 billion against approximately 433,000 Australians. Then, including through private debt collection agencies, the Commonwealth pursued people to repay these wrongly asserted debts, and recovered approximately $751 million from about 381,000 of them." — Mr. Morrison insisted to the Commissioner that the federal government's actions were legal.

Cartoon of the Week

 

Fiona Katauskas