Executive summary

The number of individuals involved in the design and rollout of the debt recovery program from 2014 – 2019, commonly referred to as the Robodebt Scheme, represents a very small percentage of public servants. Even amongst this small number, there were people who tried to do the right thing and, in identifying and escalating concerns, demonstrated the Australian Public Service (APS) Values: Committed to Service, Ethical, Respectful, Accountable and Impartial. There can be no doubt that the Robodebt Scheme is a stark example of a relatively small number of public servants making a series of poor decisions, lacking courage and curiosity to challenge assumptions, and failing to demonstrate the care, diligence and integrity that should be at the core of all we do.

The Secretaries Board agreed that the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) would establish a Centralised Code of Conduct Inquiry Taskforce (Taskforce) to support Independent Reviewers to conduct inquiries into potential breaches of the APS Code of Conduct (Code) by public servants involved in the design, delivery and monitoring of the Robodebt Scheme. On 7 July 2023, the Royal Commission published its report (Final Report) and referred a number of current public servants for inquiries into potential breaches of the Code in a sealed section to the Final Report.

The Royal Commission only referred individuals for investigation who, if found to have breached the Code, could be subject to a sanction. This meant that only current APS employees who may be subject to sanctions were proposed for a possible Code investigation by the APSC.

To ensure equitable treatment of current APS employees, further consideration was given to whether additional referrals to the Taskforce were warranted for former APS employees and former Agency Heads. 

The inquiries were conducted in accordance with paragraphs 41(2)(k), 41(2)(m) and 41(2)(n) of the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth) (Public Service Act).

The Public Service Commissioner (Commissioner) delegated powers to Mr Stephen Sedgwick AO as Independent Reviewer to undertake inquiries into current and former APS employees. Mr Sedgwick has now completed his inquiries.

The Commissioner delegated powers to Ms Penny Shakespeare as Supplementary Reviewer to undertake inquiries into the conduct of former Agency Heads. Ms Shakespeare has now completed her inquiries.

The Commissioner received 16 referrals to the APSC’s Taskforce, consisting of:

• current APS employees named in the sealed section of the Royal Commission’s Final Report;
• former APS employees referred by their most recent Agency Head; and
• former Agency Heads referred by the Minister following advice from the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Twelve current and former public servants and former Agency Heads have been found to have breached the Code on 97 occasions. The breaches include lack of care and diligence and lack of integrity in performing duties, as well as instances of misleading others and failing to uphold APS values. Some individuals were found not to be in breach or their actions did not meet the necessary threshold at certain stages of the process.

Sanctions have been imposed against the four current APS employees found to have breached the Code. The sanctions imposed ranged from reprimands and fines to demotions. A number of respondents resigned or retired from APS employment prior to, or during, these inquiries and were therefore not subject to sanctions.

Throughout the course of the inquiries, the wellbeing of individuals subject to the inquiry remained a critical and continual priority. This is true for any disciplinary inquiry which is, by its nature, a stressful and distressing experience for any person. However these inquiries posed additional risks for individual wellbeing due to the unprecedented public scrutiny, particularly if they appeared at the Royal Commission hearings.

Procedural fairness was afforded to each individual, with reasonable timeframes provided to respond at each stage of the process and opportunities to provide further evidence for consideration by the Independent Reviewers.

The Parliament and the public expect accountability for the APS’s actions. Being as transparent as possible about the inquiry process and its outcomes is critical to meeting that expectation. Part A of this Report sets out the number and range of breaches upheld and sanctions imposed, without disclosing the identity of individuals.

Critically for the APS, Part B of this Report provides insights and observations about individual behaviours, responsibilities, and processes. The inquiries unearthed examples of public servants who acted or failed to act at critical junctures, supported by enterprise-level and more localised workplace cultures that discouraged openness, curiosity, courage and collaboration. The Robodebt experience offers important lessons for all public servants and Government agencies.

Integrity and care are at the heart of these inquiries. It’s about the integrity and care taken by the public servants involved in the Robodebt Scheme, but it’s also about the integrity of the public service arrangements that are established to develop public policy and service delivery options, provide advice, and identify and correct mistakes. Public policy and service delivery options are properly developed in response to an identified problem. Options are then best assessed against two critical questions often summarised as ‘can we?’ (is it legal?) and ‘should we?’ (is it ethical / the right thing to do?)[1]. At critical points during Robodebt neither of these questions was properly examined or satisfactorily answered.