Robert Menzies rejected the idea that social welfare should be means-tested. Given the current furore over the Centrelink debt-recovery debacle, this is a fascinating reminder of how far politics has shifted since then. Despite exploiting fears about Labor's supposed "socialist objective", Menzies expanded social welfare to introduce the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, increased support for age pensioners and increased unemployment and other benefits. My late grandmother Roma was one of Menzies' secretaries. Even in her 70s, she came over a little misty-eyed when his name was mentioned. "He was a great man," she'd say. "A real gentleman." As was the tradition of her time, when Roma married my grandfather John, she had to give away her paid job. Her job was now to raise four children, and keep house. It was a job she did with great skill and care. But if she was doing that job now, she would in all likelihood have qualified for the childcare rebate and perhaps the family tax benefit. Perhaps in time she might have received the age pension. And perhaps she might have received one of the thousands of letters being sent to everyday Australians demanding they repay Centrelink money.

So great is the welfare state now, thanks to successive governments expanding the expectation of entitlement into ever-greater areas, it was estimated in 2014 that more than 50 per cent of Australian households received some support from the government. In that sense, it is politically disastrous for the government to pick a fight with welfare recipients in the ham-fisted manner it has done. The new automated system cross-checks Centrelink records with Tax Office and other records, and has so far calculated that more than 169,000 Australians probably owe the government money. There are early indications that recipients of the age pension and family tax benefits have received notices, and that they will increasingly be targeted as the program is rolled out to more and more Australians. As others have pointed out, it places the onus of proof on individuals to show that a government super-agency has correctly paid them. Some people have been contacted over alleged debts eight years old. The Australian Taxation Office requires taxpayers to keep records for five years if they have claimed depreciations, have acquired or disposed of an asset, or are in dispute with the ATO. Payment summaries must only be kept for two years.

Badgering people in the lead-up to Christmas to go through eight-year-old payslips (in the unlikely event they have been kept) or face a default debt is one thing; but going after some of the most vulnerable people in the country to repay "debts" they have no way of proving are real or false, stinks. As Victoria Legal Aid's executive director of civil justice, Dan Nicholson, points out, according to Centrelink's own figures, 37.5 per cent of decisions were changed on review before it launched its automated data-matching process. Essentially, Centrelink is demanding of those it now calls "customers" exactly that which Menzies warned against: it is asking people to prove their poverty, a demand that is inherently demeaning. Worse, many of those who have been swept up in the debt-recovery campaign are people who spent a matter of months receiving benefits before going on to get a job – people who, as it were, collected on their insurance policy for mere months. Social Security Rights Victoria is dedicated to providing legal advice and help for people battling various Centrelink complaints.

As a not-for-profit organisation, it runs on a shoestring (posting a $16,412 deficit last financial year), and relies on the skill and goodwill of volunteers and a tiny crew of paid staff to help some of the most vulnerable people in the state. Last year it helped 2310 people – an increase of 21 per cent on the previous financial year. It is funded primarily by the federal government, with a smaller contribution from the state government, as well as small grants. From July it faces – like many other community legal centres – a 30 per cent cut in federal government funding, which its principal lawyer Graham Wells estimates will strip about $40,000 from its operations. "We will keep operating but short of fundraising ... or seeking donations via social media, it's going to be tight," he says.

"We are now in the position where the legal need has grown so much, we have to triage what work we can take on as casework." Since the Centrelink crackdown began, SSRV has been overwhelmed with calls for help. During the usually quiet holiday period, the organisation has been overrun by demand. The phones are running off the hook. In the next few months, as Centrelink sends out more and more letters in its bid to claw back $4.5 billion in debt, demand is likely to go through the roof. But the organisation, thanks to federal budget cuts, will be less and less likely to help those who need it most. One wonders what Menzies would make of it all. Bianca Hall is legal affairs reporter for The Age.