‘Not a closed chapter’: The legacy of Robodebt scandal still lingers five years after illegal scheme was axed

Homeless disability pensioner Glenn Campbell believes Robodebt is still heaping misery on welfare recipients.

The cruel and illegal scheme was axed in May 2020, but the 62-year-old claims his own experience showed the social security system remained a minefield for vulnerable Australians.

The Perth man has waged a six-year-battle with Services Australia, all while living out of the back of a van. It wasn’t so much the modest sum of money involved that motivated his fight, but the principle, he claimed.

“(The system) still spits out these inaccurate debts,” he said.

The peak organisation for community legal centres providing specialist advice to welfare recipients has backed up his claims, saying Robodebt was “not a closed chapter in history”.

“The Government has not yet implemented key legislative change off the back of this disaster. These issues persist as a result, and the consequences are still being felt by many Australians,” Economic Justice Australia chief executive Kate Allingham told The West Australian.

Earlier this month, the Federal Government agreed to pay $475 million in compensation to Robodebt victims in what is set to be the largest class action settlement in Australian history.

Mr Campbell wasn’t impacted by income averaging using Taxation Office data — a key feature of the automated Robodebt scheme that created flawed calculations and bogus debts.

Instead, he believes he’s among other categories of welfare recipients who’ve been wronged.

The Albanese Government has acknowledged millions of potentially miscalculated social security debts resulting from what it describes as ‘income apportionment’. Like Robodebt, income apportionment was unlawful, but was used over a much longer period — more than 30 years.

Although Mr Campbell has now squashed the claims against him, he said he still hasn’t received an adequate explanation of what went wrong in his case.

He was self-represented in three hearings before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, in which he successfully challenged the agency’s decisions.

He was “in crisis on a number of fronts” when he first approached Centrelink for assistance in 2019.

I was suicidal. I had mental health issues. I was homeless. I’d been long-term unemployed. There was a family breakdown. I was living in my vehicle and had exhausted all my savings

“It was the first time I’d ever asked for help in my life.”

Mr Campbell, who had PTSD from a previous trauma, said he’s asked about the possibility of being assessed for a disability pension.

“They’ said, ‘no, we can’t assist you’ and sent me down the path of the Newstart (Allowance),” he said.

“That dumbfounded me, because I thought, well, you’ve got to understand the person you’re dealing with to know where to place them in the system. I’ve since found out that no vulnerability indicator was placed on my file at that time.”

Vulnerability indicators identify people who might need additional support.

Mr Campbell did manage to get himself casual employment for a short while in late 2019, working as gatekeeper directing traffic on a mine site in Greenbushes.

He declared his income, but was hit with a debt over Newstart payments he’d received for the previous reporting fortnight. He paid the money, but complained to no avail and eventually took the matter to the AAT.

Following the first AAT hearing, the tribunal sent the matter back to Centrelink for recalculation based on Mr Campbell’s payslips. It noted “Mr Campbell has done his best to comply with the legislation”.

“The tribunal is not satisfied that correct and verified employment income has been utilised in the debt calculation,” it said in November 2020.

The recalculation resulted in a Centrelink review officer determining there was a debt to the agency of $646.48. This prompted another AAT hearing in April 2021, which determined it was $567.80.

Mr Campbell sought a further review of that figure, but before the hearing he was offered a settlement waiving the entire sum in February 2023.

The following year he went to the AAT a fourth time over $81.11 he claimed had not been repaid to him. This was “on principle”, because it included a recovery fee that shouldn’t have been raised, he said.

He also alleged he’d discovered documents via a Freedom of Information application that Centrelink had withheld from the AAT previously. He claimed this showed an intent to deceive.

The tribunal chose to place on record some of Mr Campbell’s concerns including alleged fraud, but said that doing so shouldn’t be interpreted as it endorsing them.

“The tribunal’s role is limited to conducting reviews of (Centrelink) decisions and making correct and preferable decisions according to law,” it said.

The tribunal sent the matter back to Centrelink’s chief executive for reconsideration once again.

Mr Campbell’s application for a disability support pension was accepted this year.

On Friday, Services Australia General Manager Hank Jongen said his agency “recognised that Mr Campbell has had a negative experience in his interactions with our agency, and we sincerely regret any distress caused.”

“We acknowledge that navigating social security systems can be difficult for individuals with complex vulnerabilities,” he added.

“We’ve offered further assistance to Mr Campbell to ensure he is receiving all appropriate support.

“In Mr Campbell’s case, we have carefully followed the decisions of the AAT and always acted promptly in accordance with those findings.

“While there are no systemic issues or automated decisions impacting Mr Campbell’s debts, we recognise the rules around income reporting prior to December 2020 were complex and could lead to misreporting and overpayments.

“Since December 2020, customers have been able to report the income they’ve actually been paid during the reporting period, rather than estimating earnings. This change has made income reporting simpler, more accurate, and less stressful — especially for vulnerable customers.

“If anyone disagrees with a decision or wants more information about a decision we’ve made we encourage them to ask for an explanation or apply for a formal review.”

Mr Jongen said Services Australia had implemented a range of initiatives to better support customers experiencing vulnerability.

“We’ve significantly increased the number of social workers available across service centres, telephony, online channels, and outreach services. This includes trauma-informed support for customers affected by family and domestic violence, mental health challenges, and other complex circumstances,” he said,

“We’ve implemented a secure and streamlined channel for community legal advocates to directly engage with highly trained staff on behalf of customers in crisis or with complex needs.”

Under-resourced community legal centres in WA say they can’t keep pace with demand and turned away an estimated 38,000 people in the 2023/2024 year.

Economic Justice Australia said the situation was more acute in regional areas.

“We recently released a report that looks comprehensively into the various barriers people face when trying to access social security payments,” CEO Kate Allingham told The West Australian.

“Barriers are dramatically exacerbated in regional, rural, remote and very remote areas. As it stands, people’s ability to access social security payments is not equitable, and many are being denied this fundamental right for reasons largely beyond their control, such as where they live or how easily they are able to access a computer.”