How long can the conservative myth of superior economic management be sustained? Having already overestimated the original disbursement of Job-keeper allocations by $60 billion (46% error), the federal government has gifted about $25 billion to unqualified enterprises. Intended to maintain a snug relationship with employees, Job-keeper largesse has been pocketed by companies who actually made a profit during the pandemic crisis ($13 billion) or whose profit did not fall by the required 30% or 50% thresholds ($12 billion estimated).
Should the government perceive an overpayment by Centrelink the client will be pursued, sometimes unto death. The response to the unethical gaming of Job-keeper by unqualified companies was to make light of the presumed unwitting error. Just keep it, no harm done. This response takes the presumption of innocence to new depths and has one surmising if it was a deliberate transfer of wealth to those needing it least from those who need it most and will obligingly spend it. We are left to wonder if this government is deliberately corrupt or just devastatingly incompetent.
Is there a logic that would support a decision not to claw back ill-gotten money? The Australian Taxation Office will not release details of recipients whose estimates of impending doom were grossly over catastrophized. Temporary respondent, bus road-kill minister Birmingham, regards questions on this as “smartarsed”. Is it impudent to want to know how and when taxpayers can recoup their $25 billion of public debt? Public criticism could further erode trust in government, placing it under the same ethical umbrella as banks and politicians under scrutiny for corrupt practices. That is, we should presume they’ve done nothing wrong until it is, inevitably, proven that they have, and meanwhile not dent our confidence in government.
If claw back provisions were not in place because it may dissuade businesses from applying, that logic suggests businesses want to scam the system and we must not stand in their way. We are reminded here that some businesses will engage in fraud if permitted by opportunity and a pathway to deception. This is in keeping with the PM’s tendency to squirm, wriggle, subvert, spin and redefine. If the question put to him is too embarrassing the tactic becomes “I don’t accept the premise of your question”. In the case of Job-keeper criticism he trots out how he’s not into the politics of envy. Could someone tell him this is not about envy but justice and equity, or does he not understand those concepts?
Josh thinks labor wants to make lawbreakers out of businesses. Well, if the cap fits, Josh may have to accept the evidence that many indeed are lawbreakers and have conspired to be so. His compelling logic was not applied in the case of robodebt, which is manifestly unfair. The Treasurer has pre-emptively defended fraud and enlisted support from the ATO. Would a federal Integrity Commission find anything wrong with this? Let’s name them, shame them, impose some enforceable undertakings on them, and fine them.
So next election, remember these superior economic managers sprayed debt like liquid fertilizer and will not countenance spending on ordinary citizens because that would be reckless.
David Muscio
11 October, 2021
Awesomely Astute 