I have read and watched the evidence of those involved in this sordid tale of political skulduggery, and I dread to think about what lay ahead for the chief protagonists.
In my email inbox sits the latest newsletter from the Robodebt Royal Commission. It reads as follows.
23 June 2023
“The Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme has updated a Do Not Publish order.
DNP-0022 has been updated further to include an additional exception on point (c) and (d) of page one.
The truth shall set you free, or will it?
That is a week from now, but those like me who want justice done must wait until the Parliament sits again on Monday, 3 July. It will receive the report then and release it soon afterwards. Well, that’s what I expect to happen. A statement as inflammable as this will require the Government’s immediate attention.
The report promises to be highly explosive, with former Prime Minister Morrison, Attorney General Porter, Minister Tudge, Minister Robert, and Minister Payne facing an uncertain future. It is plain to all and sundry that some or possibly all of those mentioned will face further investigation by the Federal Police. And you can add to that a culpable public service.
Finally, the truth will emerge from an exhaustive Royal Commission by the Commissioner Catherine Holmes AC SC.
The Royal Commission was established to:
“… enquire into the establishment, design and implementation of the Robodebt scheme; the use of third-party debt collectors under the Robodebt scheme; concerns raised following the performance of the Robodebt scheme; and the intended or actual outcomes of the Robodebt scheme.”
The cruelty of the scheme, as has been widely reported:
“More than 2030 people died after receiving a Centrelink debt notice, also known as robo-debt, according to data released by the Department of Human Services.”
The Royal Commission spent over nine weeks in a Brisbane hotel ballroom cross-examining one hundred witnesses, including three former Prime Ministers. They were all sworn to tell the truth. Sometimes a little blood fell onto the dance floor.
Hours passed, and sometimes hours bled into days as public servants waited to give evidence. Politicians were forensically asked questions by a King’s Council and a former Queensland chief justice about one of the country’s most egregious failures of public administration. Arguably the worst failure in public policy in Australian political history.
The witnesses in this sordid affair were taken as far back as 2014 and questioned about emails, conversations, and even scribbled notes. In doing so, it found the origin of a government program that would unleash misery on the country’s most vulnerable.
A woman with extraordinary deftness led the Royal Commission and did what a court probably couldn’t. She wrenched open the iron gates of legal professional privilege and cabinet confidentiality to expose the passageways of power.
Why did the Government proceed with the scheme after finding it illegal? That is the big question. Who was responsible? Let’s hope Catherine Ena Holmes, AC SC, will provide the answers.
[textblock style=”4″]
My thought for the day
Do you shape the truth for the sake of a good impression? On the other hand, do you tell the truth even if it may tear down people’s view of you? Alternatively, do you use the contrivance of omission and create another lie? I can only conclude that there is always pain in truth, but there is no harm in it.
[/textblock]
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
