5 ms·

As far as I can tell, roughly speaking the same thing was implemented in the 1960s in Sweden. Correctly. It does of course make it a lot easier when there's a

by zgluck 3y ago

As far as I can tell, roughly speaking the same thing was implemented in the 1960s in Sweden. Correctly. It does of course make it a lot easier when there's a central database with unique identifiers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identity_number_(Sweden) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identity_number_(Swed...) identifying individuals.

hugh-avherald 3y ago
The identifiers weren't the (technical) problem. It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income. Of course, the real problem was that a single APS4 had vastly more moral fibre and leadership quality than the Minister, Secretary, and Deputy Secretary put together.
- zgluck 3y ago
  > It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income. And that is a problem because...?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - ImAnAmateur 3y ago
    Because the Australian government averaged the yearly income to see if the average fortnight was below the mark. Instead of following the law which gave benefits to those who had low income for a brief period. This was not a software issue. This was a willful top-down policy choice to use bad math. (At least, so the article says. I don't live in Australia.)
    - zethex 3y ago
      What was also amazing about it, is they would use your old address when you received welfare payments, but not update this from other systems such as the tax system. This meant that the debt letters were being sent to the wrong place, and then eventually handed over to debt collectors to chase. Credit scores were impacted because of this.
      - zgluck 3y ago
        So actually a matter of lack of unique id (and a properly registered address), then. Huh.
        llamaLord 3y ago
        No you're not understanding. There is a unique ID, in this particular context it's called a CRN (customer reference number). Every person who receives social security in Australia has one and they're fixed for life. The lack of unique ID has nothing to do with this. This was government blatantly attacking poor people through willful mismanagement of an automated debt inferment system in conflict with the legal process through which that debt should have been calculated. They 100% knew what they were doing and did it deliberately.
    - cam_l 3y ago
      Well.. math works differently down here, after all.. "The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia" (fmr PM)
  - adrian_mrd 3y ago
    From the article: "To understand why, consider someone who spent three months of the year receiving unemployment benefits while they searched for a job, then worked for nine months. The government considered their income for the entire year and averaged it, then assessed their eligibility for payments based on their average fortnightly earnings – not their income when they were out of work and therefore eligible for payments."
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    That's what the article is about, go read it
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- pessimizer 3y ago
  The real problem is that there will never be any consequences for the Minister, Secretary, and Deputy Secretary. For them, it was an excellent program that burnished their resumes and gave their brands a bit of "tough on the freeloaders" style. It was an excellent decision for them to have made, and if other officials now or in the future are confronted by a similar choice, in terms of their own personal benefit it would be an excellent decision for them to make again.
  - amathyst 3y ago
    You’re probably right but, man, I hope you’re wrong. We’ll see if anything comes of the sealed section of the report that’s been referred to the AFP (FBI equivalent).
    - perilunar 3y ago
      Yeah, there better be jail time for the top offenders. We've just seen Berejiklian get off despite "serious corrupt conduct" in NSW. What's the point of having anti-corruption watchdogs if they have no teeth?
- pmontra 3y ago
  > APS4 Australian Public Service employee, level 4? (googled it but a bit unsure)
  - jen729w 3y ago
    Correct. Low-level, you start at APS1 and APS6 is the top of the ‘not an executive’ ladder.
- someNameIG 3y ago
  > It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income It could have worked if it had human review after the system flagged it. Instead the debt was sent out automatically and it was a guilty until proven innocent thing. The people setting up the system knew it was wrong and illegal but they didn't care as they liked using the poor as a revenue raiser, and politically the "dole bludgers" are a good target.
its-summertime 3y ago
https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Tax-file-number/What-is-a-tax-file-number-/ https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Tax-file-number/What-is-a...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

by zgluck 3y ago

hugh-avherald 3y ago

The identifiers weren't the (technical) problem. It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income. Of course, the real problem was that a single APS4 had vastly more moral fibre and leadership quality than the Minister, Secretary, and Deputy Secretary put together.

zgluck 3y ago
> It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income. And that is a problem because...?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ImAnAmateur 3y ago
  Because the Australian government averaged the yearly income to see if the average fortnight was below the mark. Instead of following the law which gave benefits to those who had low income for a brief period. This was not a software issue. This was a willful top-down policy choice to use bad math. (At least, so the article says. I don't live in Australia.)
  - zethex 3y ago
    What was also amazing about it, is they would use your old address when you received welfare payments, but not update this from other systems such as the tax system. This meant that the debt letters were being sent to the wrong place, and then eventually handed over to debt collectors to chase. Credit scores were impacted because of this.
    - zgluck 3y ago
      So actually a matter of lack of unique id (and a properly registered address), then. Huh.
      - llamaLord 3y ago
        No you're not understanding. There is a unique ID, in this particular context it's called a CRN (customer reference number). Every person who receives social security in Australia has one and they're fixed for life. The lack of unique ID has nothing to do with this. This was government blatantly attacking poor people through willful mismanagement of an automated debt inferment system in conflict with the legal process through which that debt should have been calculated. They 100% knew what they were doing and did it deliberately.
  - cam_l 3y ago
    Well.. math works differently down here, after all.. "The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia" (fmr PM)
- adrian_mrd 3y ago
  From the article: "To understand why, consider someone who spent three months of the year receiving unemployment benefits while they searched for a job, then worked for nine months. The government considered their income for the entire year and averaged it, then assessed their eligibility for payments based on their average fortnightly earnings – not their income when they were out of work and therefore eligible for payments."
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  That's what the article is about, go read it
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
pessimizer 3y ago
The real problem is that there will never be any consequences for the Minister, Secretary, and Deputy Secretary. For them, it was an excellent program that burnished their resumes and gave their brands a bit of "tough on the freeloaders" style. It was an excellent decision for them to have made, and if other officials now or in the future are confronted by a similar choice, in terms of their own personal benefit it would be an excellent decision for them to make again.
- amathyst 3y ago
  You’re probably right but, man, I hope you’re wrong. We’ll see if anything comes of the sealed section of the report that’s been referred to the AFP (FBI equivalent).
  - perilunar 3y ago
    Yeah, there better be jail time for the top offenders. We've just seen Berejiklian get off despite "serious corrupt conduct" in NSW. What's the point of having anti-corruption watchdogs if they have no teeth?
pmontra 3y ago
> APS4 Australian Public Service employee, level 4? (googled it but a bit unsure)
- jen729w 3y ago
  Correct. Low-level, you start at APS1 and APS6 is the top of the ‘not an executive’ ladder.
someNameIG 3y ago
> It was that the taxation office collected information on an annual basis whereas the benefits law is based on fortnightly income It could have worked if it had human review after the system flagged it. Instead the debt was sent out automatically and it was a guilty until proven innocent thing. The people setting up the system knew it was wrong and illegal but they didn't care as they liked using the poor as a revenue raiser, and politically the "dole bludgers" are a good target.

its-summertime 3y ago

https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Tax-file-number/What-is-a-tax-file-number-/ https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Tax-file-number/What-is-a...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]