Furness recommended the Nacc revisit the controversial decision, which had already been the subject of 900 complaints when she promised in June to inquire into the matter.
Following the inspector’s recommendation, the Nacc will now appoint an “independent eminent person” to deliberate afresh on a possible corruption investigation into robodebt.
Good. Public office should not be a shield for objectively bad actions.
In a country where a 10yo indigenous kid can be held fully responsible for their crimes we still can’t prosecute rich and powerful people who have full comprehension of their actions and know they will never face consequences. We can lower the age of criminal responsibility to sweep inconvenient social issues created by bad economic and social policy under the carpet. So why can’t we lower the bar for criminal responsibility in cases of maladministration, fraud and favoritism by public officials? Surely they should be held to higher standards than some ignorant kid.
Borderline corrupt behavior by the corruption commissioner okay because he didn’t mean it. Ok.
my bet, secret hearings and one person scapegoated.
Really hoping I’m wrong.
No parliamentarians have been referred so we already know the architects are off scott-free
