The department, through its Minister, Stuart Robert, has gone so far as to say averaged income data will no longer be used as a sole criteria to raise a debt and that many of the previous debts generated using this method would be reviewed.

That is the good news, especially for those who have been on a hiding to nothing in their David vs Goliath battles to obtain a fair hearing from the megadepartment in what appeared to be an ideologically driven exercise in victim blaming.

Despite this tacit admission they had dropped the ball, neither the Minister or any of his minions, are about to apologise for the anxiety their pursuit of some of the most vulnerable members of our society has caused or even concede they may have got it wrong.

It's no so much the apology you make when you don't want to make an apology as no apology at all. That's pretty pathetic given it has been suggested dozens, if not hundreds, of people may have been so intimidated by the process they have taken their own lives as a result.

According to one report at least 2030 people died after receiving a robodebt notice between July 2016 and last October. Of those 429 were under the age of 35. The family of one man who took his own life said the robodebt letter had contributed to his suicide: "People with severe depression don't handle pressure," his mother said.

Human Services, for the record, in February denied any link between deaths and the discrepancy notices.

According to Mr Robert the process has simply been "refined". This comes after the department told a Senate committee more than half a million debts had been raised and about one third of those contacted had not responded to letters asking them to explain their alleged incomes.

Another 30 per cent did not finish the process.

Despite this both the Minister and the Department have claimed only "a small cohort" of people would be affected by the "refinement" and that they would be contacted over time as their cases were identified.

"Human Services is... in the process of identifying the small cohort of people the refinement applies to, however the group is limited to those who did not respond at all to requests for the clarification of discrepancies" a spokesman said. Up to one in three in other words.

One of the worst things about robodebt is that the computer generated letters alleging a possible debt are not reviewed by a human being before being dispatched. Another is the reverse onus of proof puts the burden on welfare recipients to prove they weren't overpaid; not on the government to prove they were.

Any private business that undertook debt recovery on this basis would be laughed out of court.

It is important to note this debacle has unfolded during a time when, under a succession of both Labor and Coalition governments, it has become harder and harder to access welfare benefits. It has also coincided with an effective freeze on Newstart which makes it virtually impossible for anybody to subsist on that allowance alone.

It would take a big person or a big hearted government to admit they got it wrong on this issue. Stuart Robert, and by extension the government of which he is a member, have failed to measure up. Why is this not surprising?