The former Coalition government lacked "empathy" for welfare recipients and were more focused on "cost savings" than problem solving, a former senior public servant has told the Robodebt royal commission.
Ex-Department of Social Services (DSS) deputy secretary Serena Wilson returned to the stand in Brisbane on Thursday, giving damning testimony of eroded relationships between senior heads of departments responsible for rolling out the unlawful debt-raising scheme.
She also detailed "disinterested" ministerial office staff, who she believed focused only on cost savings.
In a statement to the royal commission, Ms Wilson described the office of then-social services minister Scott Morrison as having "limited interest in advice from DSS" and being more concerned with costing data during the period between 2014 and 2018.
"My recollection was that it was rare that work in this period started with a discussion about the problem that the government was seeking to address," Ms Wilson said in her statement to the inquiry.
"Instead proposals were directed at finding cost savings."
When asked to explain her position further by senior counsel assisting the inquiry Justin Greggery KC, the former high-ranking public servant said she believed the minister's office did not look for the merits of different strategies relating to social security but "on occasions appeared to be looking for a problem".
Damning observations of the then Coalition government's attitude to social security were also revealed by Ms Wilson's statement, shown on Thursday to the inquiry.
"The Coalition government took a different attitude to the social security system, or as they preferred to call it, the 'welfare' system, from the previous government," the statement read.
"They had a strong view of 'deserving' and 'undeserving poor'.
"From the 2014 budget through to the 2018 budget, the vast majority of my work involved identifying saving options to cut social security expenditure.
"I had built a career trying to improve lifetime wellbeing and address the needs of disadvantaged people, but [in my opinion] there was little empathy for, or understanding of those needs within the Coalition government and ministerial staff."
When asked to elaborate, Ms Wilson told the royal commission she believed the then Coalition government had a "very pejorative view of jobless people".
Internal complaints 'fraught' in public service
Ms Wilson later did not hold back about the fractured and dysfunctional working relationship between herself and her counterpart at the Department of Human Services, Malisa Golightly.
Ms Golightly has since died.
"In terms of our working relationship … it wasn't collegiate and on a number of occasions I felt quite pushed by her or would experience push back by her," Ms Wilson said.
She said she had worked with Ms Golightly at another government department in 2005 and the pair had a "very unhappy relationship".
"I did not pursue bullying claims against her," she said, adding that making formal complaints could be a "very fraught areas in the Australian public service".
"I didn't perceive that it would likely be successful in the organisation for which I was working at that time, so I decided to seek roles elsewhere."
Wilson 'didn't read' note on income averaging
Much of Ms Wilson's time on the stand centred around the assertion she had communicated concerns to DHS bureaucrats about the scheme that later became Robodebt.
She recalled conversations with Ms Golightly where she said she raised concerns about income averaging but had no memory of an executive ministerial minute that explained the policy would roll out with income averaging at its core.
"I didn't have a lot of knowledge about the proposed implementation, but I believed DHS had understood the concerns raised and that they accepted our position and that they would change and intended to change their approach," Ms Wilson said.
Ms Wilson was asked why despite the difficult relationship she shared with Ms Golightly she was confident DSS's concerns had been taken on board.
"I didn't believe she was deliberately untruthful person," she told the inquiry.
But it was later revealed Ms Wilson did not ask anyone at DHS, including Ms Golightly, exactly how debts would be calculated, despite being given the chance to do so on multiple occasions.
Ms Wilson later conceded the executive ministerial minute, which detailed the plans for the scheme was attached to an email she received in early 2015, but she said she did not think she read it at the time.
In a later document, which she edited for spelling mistakes, it was also explained that PAYG data would be used to calculate debts.
Mr Greggery put to Ms Wilson: "Just as in the executive minute, it was perfectly obvious the ATO data was being used to calculate entitlements?"
"Reading it now, yes," she said.
"I clearly didn't pick it up at the time."
She later said it did not "strike her at the time" that both documents were detailing that income averaging would be used because it did not explicitly use those words.
Commissioner Catherine Holmes asked Ms Wilson what she thought the documents were describing when the phrases PAYG and ATO data would be used to calculate debts.
Commissioner Holmes later put to her that the fact income averaging would be used had "slipped through".
"I think slipped through is the operative word, commissioner," Ms Wilson said.
"There is no deliberate ignoring of it … it slipped through and I regret that it slipped through."
Ms Wilson said the fact she had not asked more questions weighed "heavily" on her.
Commissioner Holmes suggested: "One perspective of it was that you were always looking the other way."
"I wish I had scrutinised it further — I wish I had asked more questions, but I didn't," Ms Wilson told the inquiry.
Commissioner Holmes continued: "Look, I could understand if in fact there was so much pressure on DSS that it was easier to let it go and let it be DHS's responsibly … is it possible is that people in DSS chose not to inquire too closely because it was seen as someone else's problem and it would make you unpopular to do so?"
Ms Wilson said: "I don't think we were looking the other way. We were extremely busy and consumed … I can see opportunities that were presented to me and others where I could have inquired further and did not. It was not a 'hear no evil, see no evil' situation."
'I relied on the advice of others'
One of the architects of the scheme told the royal commission he was never told it was unlawful ahead of its implementation.
Former Department of Human Services compliance risk national manager Scott Britton fronted the inquiry for the second time.
He recounted tight turn around times for devising savings measures while working with DHS, and said he was often asked "what savings do you have when can you deliver them?"
"The imperative was the dollars, often," Mr Britton said.
Angus Scott KC later showed Mr Britton an email he was sent in 2015, which detailed concerns from DSS lawyers about the program.
"I accept that the email from DSS indicated they had legal opinion and legal advice … that I did not see … suggests there is an issue," he said.
"I don't think it's that explicit … I don't think it was that binary in the way you describe it."
However, he later conceded that looking at the email with "clean eyes" it indicated at the time there were potential legal issues.
"At no stage prior to the policy proposal that became Robodebt was action by you taken to get legal advice?" Mr Scott asked.
Mr Britton replied: "No, that's correct. I relied on the advice of others, that's correct, I did not seek independent legal advice."
He said he was "worried about the pressure that was being applied" to get the scheme rolled out.
"There was a lot of pressure, like, a lot of pressure to get it through," Mr Britton recalled.
He was later asked by Commissioner Holmes about that pressure.
"How much did it stand out as a budget measure? How remarkable was it?" she asked.
Mr Britton replied: "I remember saying this is crazy, the pressure is huge, it was unrelenting, the focus was on savings.
"It was the biggest set of measures I've ever seen in my 30-odd years."
The royal commission continues.
