Senator Matt Canavan has called out Katy Gallagher on her claims that the national Digital ID will be voluntary:
“You can either trust the politician that told you it’s voluntary, or think about how you’ve been treated the last few years.”
The Digital Identity Bill may be the most significant piece of legislation this 47th parliament will introduce. The effect of this bill is to tie every Australian to a digital identity that unlocks services necessary for life. This bill does not make identifying oneself online easier. It will facilitate making a digital identity check mandatory. That onerous measure comes at the price of putting identifying information for every Australian in the one spot and emits a giant, flashing, neon sign above everyone, saying, ‘Hack me.’ The ALP, Greens and the crossbench have rightly condemned the robodebt tragedy, yet the program was based on the same hubris and arrogance that informs this legislation. Time will be needed to review four key areas: the technical feasibility of a digital identity in light of previous data-matching failures; security over the data; the outcomes from identical legislation in other jurisdictions; and implications for misuse of digital identity. If those in this chamber are unaware of the significance of this legislation then they are proving the need to extend the inquiry period.
Katy Gallagher
Everything that Senator Roberts just said is incorrect and is not part of the bill. It is not mandatory; it is actually putting in place legislation that regulates the existing system—10½ million Australians have a myGov ID. The system is working under the TDIF that the opposition put in place.
This reform started in 2014, when it was recommended. There have been nine years of work. I have been getting representations from the opposition—from the shadow minister—to say that we are being too slow in putting this in place, and now the opposition are going to vote to delay it. When you meet with business and small business, this is the thing that they want in place. They want a regulator in place. They want legislation around it. It is not about giving anybody a digital identity. It is about people being able—