Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

UN and human rights lawyers slam Australia for digital welfare ‘fiasco’

A United Nations human rights expert has slammed Australia and Prime Minister Scott Morrison for the failed, and possibly illegal, emergence of the “digital welfare state”.

user iconNaomi Neilson 21 October 2019 Politics
United Nations headquarters
expand image

The Human Rights Law Centre (HRLC) has joined special rapporteur Philip Alston in calling for Australia to address its robodebt, payment cards and communications with welfare recipients to ensure it is no longer harmful and there is a proper legal basis.

Lawyer at HRLC Monique Hurley said Australia needs a fair social security net as the UN looks to hold it up as an example of failing its most vulnerable citizens.

“The Morrison government is designing a social security system that is focused on a punishment and automation, rather than dignity and humanity. Advances in technology have the power to do enormous good, but for that to happen, ending inequality must be central to their design. People’s rights and wellbeing cannot be the price we pay,” she said.

Mr Alston’s report noted the digitalisation of welfare systems has been used as a way to promote deep reductions in the overall welfare budget, elimination of some services, introduction of intrusive forms of confidentiality and imposition of stronger regimes.

“As humankind moves, perhaps inexorably, towards the digital welfare future it needs to alter course significantly and rapidly to avoid stumbling zombie-like into the digital welfare dystopia,” Mr Alston said in a report to be presented to the general assembly.

He held Australia as an example for system errors or failures that generated problems for large numbers of beneficiaries, citing robodebt as a “fiasco”. He said digital welfare states risk becoming “Trojan Horses” for neoliberal hostility towards regulation.

Australia’s Target Compliance Framework took one of the biggest hits, with Mr Alston calling it a failure for a lack of internet access and digital literacy, “to the rigidity of the automated system which fails to take real-life situations into account”.

The government’s online compliance intervention system, which uses automated data matching as the basis to send out large numbers of debt notices with “very high error rates”, shows a lack of attention to the importance of ensuring legality.

“Robodebt has seen the Morrison government bully people into paying debts they do not owe, in an attempt to prioritise efficiency over human rights,” Ms Hurley said.

The Cashless Debit Card, which the Morrison government is trying to roll out further, was also slammed, with Mr Alston labelling it as an “important human rights concern”. His other concern was in how welfare recipients are made to feel embarrassment and shame for using the cards, which are clearly recognisable as welfare-related.

“The Cashless Debit Card is the government micro-managing people’s lives – denying people the freedom to make decisions about where to buy everyday essentials, such as food and clothes,” Ms Hurley said. “The Morrison government’s attempt to force this new form of income control in the Northern Territory should be opposed.”

Mr Alston warned the increased and unchecked use of technology by the government in the social security system risks exacerbating the biases of existing data policies. Its algorithms are noted as forms of discrimination and undermines right to social security.

He added there is a consistent reluctance for governments to regulate the activities of technology companies and a strong resistance to take into account systematic account of human rights considerations. He said it is further exacerbated by the extent to which the private sector is taking a leading role in operating the digital welfare state.

“While the lack of a legal basis is deeply problematic per se, this gap also means that opportunities for legislative debate and for public inputs into shaping relevant systems [are] also lacking. This has major potentially negative implications for transparency and design, legitimacy and the likelihood of acceptance,” Mr Alston said.

naomi.neilson@momentummedia.com.au

Naomi Neilson

Naomi Neilson

Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly. 

You can email Naomi at: naomi.neilson@momentummedia.com.au

Comments (6)
  • Avatar
    I don't remember voting for the UN. Bunch of out of touch ultra-lefties.
    3
  • Avatar
    Why am I in 2013 when I click on Latest Stories? I commented on this last week and only the articles have changed. The articles are still years ago.
    0
  • Avatar
    How absolutely embarrassing!
    0
  • Avatar
    The debit card is not just micro managing. It is also fascist in nature. It is clearly anti competitive favouring supporting and promoting the big businesses run by a few government mates to the disadvantage of SME,s and ultimately result in many small business failures by denying a sizeable group of consumers the ability to decide where to spend THEIR money - remember the government does not create income and wealth - it merely takes from the public that creates it and the creators of that wealth include the poor and welfare recipients
    0
    • Avatar
      No it isn't. It's ensuring that people only use the money they get from the tax payer for appropriate purposes (not drugs and alcohol).

      Ps the cashless card is supported by the communities into which it has been introduced.

      Never has there been such a clear disconnect between the rich, inner city, luvvie handwringers and the majority of Australia.
      1
    • Avatar
      It's not 'THEIR money'. It's OTHER PEOPLE'S money, taken from them without their consent.
      0
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!