A former Department of Social Services official has denied trying to conceal evidence from the federal watchdog that first investigated the robodebt scandal.
A royal commission is examining why and how the unlawful Centrelink debt recovery scheme was established in 2015 and ran until November 2019, ending in a $1.8bn settlement with hundreds of thousands of victims.
Robert Hurman, a former director of payment integrity and debt strategy, was responsible for handling the Department of Social Services’ response to the commonwealth ombudsman’s investigation into the scheme.
With the program generating significant controversy by early 2017, the ombudsman sought internal documents from departments running the program, including any legal advice.
The royal commission has previously heard the departments were given secret, damning advice in late 2014 that suggested robodebt may be unlawful. During the ombudsman’s 2017 investigation it sought new advice, which was more favourable.
On Wednesday, the inquiry heard Hurman initially proposed not providing the damning 2014 document to the watchdog so only the positive legal advice would be shared. He later changed his mind after complaints from the legal branch.
After the ombudsman discovered the 2014 advice through other inquiries, the department was later asked for all documents and notes relating to it.
But Hurman told the royal commission he took no steps to obtain the information nor hand it over.
Justin Greggery KC, the senior counsel assisting the commission, said those documents were crucial for allowing the watchdog to understand the context of the 2014 advice.
The department had told the ombudsman the 2014 advice was based on earlier information and therefore not directly relevant to the robodebt scheme, which the commission has heard was untrue.
Greggery said a possible explanation for Hurman’s actions was he was not “interested in being upfront with the ombudsman”. “You were in fact trying to conceal information which reduced scrutiny of whether the scheme was lawful,” he said.
Hurman denied this, but said he was unable to explain himself further.
Greggery said Hurman had “adopted a course where you were not full and frank with the ombudsman”.
Hurman told the inquiry it was “not my intention” to be anything other than full and frank with the watchdog.
Greggery later said there was a “pattern of behaviour” from DSS officials, including Hurman, who tried to establish the “lawfulness of the scheme” to the watchdog “irrespective of the true position”.
Hurman replied: “I think we always tried to put in a positive light.”
Hurman also conceded he signed off on a letter drafted for the DSS secretary, Finn Pratt, that indicated to the ombudsman that debts were being calculated accurately, something he knew then was untrue.
He said he took responsibility for signing off on the material and faced no pressure from above.
The ombudsman’s report is a crucial line of inquiry for the royal commission because it cleared the scheme as legal and was cited by the government in defence of the program for several years.
Earlier on Wednesday, a Department of Human Services official faced questions about her role managing the internal reviews Centrelink conducted into welfare debts and other issues.
Elizabeth Bundy, who was briefly in the role in early 2017, was asked about damning judgments from the administrative appeals tribunal that found the scheme to be unlawful.
The government never appealed these decisions, meaning the legal questions were not made public or tested by a court until years later.
Bundy conceded she had not read some of these crucial decisions, saying it was impossible to read all 13,000 judgments the tribunal made each year.
She also acknowledged she had not read the 2014 legal advice that questioned the legality of the entire scheme, saying 2017 was a “busy time”.
Bundy said her team mostly dealt with internal reviews handled by the department, while the legal team handled AAT matters more directly. Officials from the legal branch are set to appear this week.
The royal commission before Catherine Holmes AC SC continues.
