The short link to this blog posting is: https://wp.me/p1n8TZ-1ey
Here is the tracking code for my letter to SAPOL’s Commissioner, Grant Stevens.
Note the date and time of posting: 10:57AM on Friday 19/10/18 with the post
After you have you checked out the tracking details, read the incredible testimony of LISA NEWMAN, the Deputy President of the Community & Public Sector Union. (CPSU, the union that represents Centrelink’s front line staff.
At page 14, Ms Newman said:
“The introduction of the automated debt processing system has been done without any consultation of effective staff or their union. We have not been consulted about the design of the system or its potential impact on staff.”
“We have watched the introduction of the system roll out with increasing levels of alarm and distress.”
“In January we started to have contact from members who were reporting that average incomes could lead to incorrect debt calculations and customers could end up paying money that they did not owe before a debt was proven to exist.”
“A mismatch in employer information could also lead to double counting of income and therefore generate false debt statistics“
“Customers would be unable to get the documentation they required to prove that the debt did not exist, and customers would not be advised of their appeal rights.“
“We have also been told by our members, as Nadine said, that the customary oversight has been removed from the system before contact with customers has been initiated and that, instead, that oversight has been limited to queries and requests for reassessments once notices have been issued and received by customers.”
“Members have been particularly disturbed by reports of managers instructing frontline staff not to correct errors that they find and instead to push customers onto self-service mechanisms and/or refer them to a different part of the department—namely, the OCI teams.”
“This week I was contacted by a member with over 20 years experience in the department and extensive knowledge of debt management processes. She described the distress she felt at seeing the integrity of the debt management process that she has worked with for many years being sacrificed to the point where staff know that customers are going to incur needless debt.“
“As she described it, the department has an obligation to pay the right person the right payment at the right rate at the right time. She told me that people are complex, with messy lives. The department has moved the burden of proof of a debt to customers, who in many cases struggle to find the required evidence to prove that they do not owe the alleged debt”.
“The system has had a significant impact on staff working with it. People have reported increased stress levels, increased absences from work, lack of sleep and increased customer aggression.”
“And I would just note to the committee that in our previous surveying on client aggression directed towards DHS staff financial stress was one of the primary triggers to incidents of aggression. Staff are also very concerned and very angry about what they see being done to some of the most vulnerable members of the community, and many feel morally conflicted in their role in this process.”
“In January we contacted the department to raise the concerns our members had contacted us to relay and also asked for a meeting with the department. We were given the advice that has generally been given to other organisations, and that is that the system was working as it was designed to work and that there was no need to meet and talk about any issues about the system in detail.”
“DHS staff—our members—want to help customers, and that is why they find it so distressing to see their department putting customers at an increased risk of depression, decreased motivation, self-harm and even suicide.”
“There have been anecdotal reports about increased levels of customer aggression directed at Centrelink workers that includes swearing, threats, physical aggression and spitting. We would make the case that the Turnbull government needs to suspend this system.”
“It needs to fix the system so that before it contacts a person over an alleged debt it has skilled and experienced staff assessing that person’s records holistically, because automated systems cannot read customer records and see the details that experienced officers can.”
“The department should also undertake an urgent risk assessment of the process to ensure that the risks to both the physical and mental health of both customers and staff are taken into consideration in the design of the system.”
“And there needs to be immediate action to reverse the damage done by cutting 5,000 permanent jobs from DHS.”
“Any new approach has to ensure that properly resourced human oversight in this agency occurs so that the government and the community can be confident that overpayments are identified and are correct.”
LISA NEWMAN’S TESTIMONY WAS COMPLETELY & UTTERLY UNREAL!
ACCORDING TO SENATOR GEORGE BRANDIS, THIS FRAUDULENT RIP-OFF WAS ALLEGEDLY INTRODUCED BY BOB HAWKE’ IN 1990, I.E. ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO, THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HAS BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY DEFRAUDING AND RANDOMLY KILLING WELFARE RECIPIENTS FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME AND NO-ONE STOPPED THEM!
COULD ANYTHING TOP THAT?
Try this: the testimony of Centrelink’s real boss (at the time), Kathryn Campbell.
Until September 2017, Centrelink’s real boss was Kathryn Campbell, not Hank Jongen the Chief Spin Doctor for Centrelink.
At page 48, Ms. Campbell’s totally unbelievable statement is recorded:
“It is quite difficult if we are not informed that a person has died. We work very diligently with state and territory governments to ensure that we are capturing information about deaths. But, sadly, there are so many recipients in the systems it is the case that sometimes we are writing to people who are no longer alive.”
The Department of Human Services does not keep a record of the people that are being killed! This is no surprise because Centrelink randomly killing its clients with heart attacks, strokes, and suicides is a major crime under work safety laws!
The South Australian Work Health & Safety Act 2012
31—Reckless conduct—Category 1
(1) A person commits a Category 1 offence if—
(a) the person has a health and safety duty; and
(b) the person, without reasonable excuse, engages in conduct that exposes an individual to whom that duty is owed to a risk of death or serious injury or illness; and
(c) the person is reckless as to the risk to an individual of death or serious injury or illness.
(a) in the case of an offence committed by an individual (other than as a person conducting a business or undertaking or as an officer of a person conducting a business or undertaking)—$300 000 or 5 years imprisonment or both;
(b) in the case of an offence committed by an individual as a person conducting a business or undertaking or as an officer of a person conducting a business or undertaking—$600 000 or 5 years imprisonment or both;
(c) in the case of an offence committed by a body corporate—$3 000 000.
Each Centrelink death –
$600,000 or 5 years imprisonment or both for the person responsible, AND;
By a body corporate (as in Centrelink)
$3,000,000 PER FATALITY.
“properly resourced human oversight”
My solution to that issue?
Call the cops!
The South Australian Police can either prosecute me for alleged criminal defamation or else investigate Centrelink’s unreported, secretly classified, officially “irrelevant” death toll.
Ronald Medlicott – A volunteer Christian lay-advocate