Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Victorian policies fail to protect taxpayers from disability fund embezzlement

By Patricia Eisele - posted Friday, 27 January 2017


Let me be clear.  The Victorian Individual Support Package disability program is a tightly-constructed, taxpayer-funded benefit entrusted to the care and responsibility of DHS.  And they are failing to do their job because DHS says their policies don't allow them to view private bank accounts, even though they are the source of the $16,000-a-month deposits made into the account.  Victoria Police can't proceed to audit the documents that would prove embezzlement without Karen's statement, which would put her in harm's way.  It's a double Catch-22 that fails to protect both Karen and the taxpayers that provide the $200,000-a-year in funding.    

I saw Karen a few days after she declined to make a formal police statement under the restrictions imposed on her.  Karen has weighed in on these communication restrictions before.  She contends that if she is not allowed to speak her mind in a confidential, free and non-coercive environment, then it is her right to refuse to participate in a process she considers flawed and discriminatory.  And even though this may produce unwanted consequences for her, I understand the ethics of her decision.  She wants the rights she is entitled to by law.  And she wants to be protected from harm.   

In our last conversation, I told Karen not to lose hope –hope that the rorting and punishment will stop; that her human rights will be restored; that she can attend university, start a career, and live the life that the State of Victoria DHS fund is provided to help her to achieve. 

Advertisement

If DHS policies prevent them from stopping the embezzlement, and Victoria Police are unable to pursue the case without Karen's formal statement, then perhaps someone in government who has a higher responsibility to taxpayers –a mandate to protect taxpayer dollars from rorting by non-disabled family members –will come forward to address this issue.  Karen certainly deserves better.  And so do taxpayers.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Patricia Eisele is an independent writer and researcher. She holds an MBA and a PhD from RMIT University. Although Dr Eisele has a personal interest in these issues, she is not employed by any organisation, nor does she represent any organisation or individual.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Patricia Eisele

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Patricia Eisele
Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy