How can Minister Gallagher claim Digital ID will be secure given government is one of the largest perpetrators of data breaches?
I questioned whether it “wouldn’t be compulsory” in the same way the government claims vaccines were never compulsory.
What Minister Gallagher failed to mention is that Section 74(4) of the Digital ID Bill allows the Digital ID to be made compulsory if a bureaucrat is “satisfied it is appropriate to do so”.
This will almost definitely be abused and makes a joke of the claim Digital ID would be voluntary.
Transcript | Tough Questions Asked on Digital ID Bill
Senator ROBERTS: My question is for the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher. ABC reports in July revealed that hackers were able to exploit loopholes in the government’s myGov system and, as of February 2023, lodged more than half a billion dollars in fraudulent tax claims. Given the minister’s claims that a digital identity would be secure, can the minister please provide an updated figure on how many billions of dollars in fraudulent claims hackers have lodged to date in exploiting myGov system vulnerabilities?
Senator Gallagher: The first thing I would say about that is myGov is different to myGovID; they are completely different things. I don’t have updated information. MyGov is the site you go to, as many people in this place will have, to engage with government in an online way. But myGovID is a digital ID that you control and own and use for verifying your identity and, if you are a business, for engaging with the tax office in particular. There are 10.5 million Australians who have a myGovID and use it for that purpose, but it is very different to the question that Senator Roberts raises around the myGov system, which I don’t have an update on. It falls under the Minister for Government Services’ portfolio. I am happy to see if there is something that minister would be able to provide you around an update on that.
MyGov obviously is a system that we invest heavily in to make sure it is useable and safe for people when they are engaging with government, but that doesn’t change the comments I made last week about the digital ID system being safe and trustworthy and voluntary. If you are an individual, you will not have to have one of these digital IDs but, if you do want one, the option is there, and it’s a way of reducing the amount of information that government collects in order to verify your identity. So, the two things, myGovID and myGov—I accept they are similarly named—are very different things indeed.
The President: Senator Roberts, a first supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, in June, Russian hackers compromised top secret Australian Defence Force data. In July, NDIS participants were exposed in a data breach, and the Department of Home Affairs leaked personal small business information. In August, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs leaked medical data. In September, Australian Federal Police data was hacked. Why is it falsely claimed the government’s digital ID is secure when the government can’t keep data secure?
Senator Gallagher: I don’t accept the proposition that’s being put by Senator Roberts. Yes, government systems are under constant attack and threat, as most businesses are in this country, from cybercrime, from hackers, and from scams and criminals that are engaged in such activity, so the government invests heavily in protecting our systems, making sure they are safe. But in a sense, you are making the argument for a digital ID, because a digital ID is about reducing the amount of information that the government holds on you about you for services. Because of the way the system works, you retain the information, but you’re able to have your ID verified through a process of exchange that allows those systems to be unlocked. Absolutely fundamental to the digital ID system is reducing the amount of information, having the safeguards in place— (Time expired)
The President: Senator Roberts, a second supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, will the government support a One Nation amendment to the digital identity bill explicitly stating that no Australian will ever be denied access to services because they do not have a digital ID? Or is the claim that the digital ID won’t be compulsory just misinformation?
Senator Gallagher: I’m happy to engage with you genuinely on digital ID. I accept your interest in it and I am very willing to work with anyone in this chamber to make sure that the legislation that passes this place is the best that it can be. In relation to your specific question, as part of the bill we do require that services be maintained and offered for people that don’t want to have a digital ID. That protection is there. I am very happy to engage with you more broadly on the bill, including in other areas that you might have concerns about.
That clause relates specifically to individuals. As you know, myGov ID is required for business-related services, and part of that is about minimising fraud and identity theft, verifying individuals as part of their engagement with the tax office.
ONE ID TO RULE US ALL
Labor has pushed ahead in lockstep with other countries to implement the World Economic Forum’s globalist control measures. I take note of the government’s answer on Digital Identity Bill which it has introduced. The idea that the government can keep our data safe is a farce.
This legislation seeks to bring about one Digital ID that does more than the MyGov digital ID or any of the others floating around. It puts all your identity eggs into one digital basket. For hackers this is truly the pot of cyber gold at the end of the woke rainbow.
Despite the minister’s protestations that this digital ID won’t be mandatory and “it’s only for your safety and convenience”, we all remember how “no jab no job” was considered free choice by the government. But this bill goes further and contains a clear provision for the government to make this digital ID mandatory if they so wish.
For Senator Gallagher to say that even the current version of MyGov digital ID is not compulsory is blatant misinformation. Centrelink won’t talk to you without it, and the legislated Directors’ ID required a MyGov digital ID for anyone who wanted to keep being a director. You can see where this is all going.
We are being corralled into a digital prison, one bill at a time. For our ‘convenience’. One Nation will oppose the government’s Digital ID.
Transcript | One ID to Rule Us All
I move:
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to questions without notice I asked today relating to digital identity.
If people want a taste of the dictatorship digital ID will be used to introduce, look no further than Minister Katy Gallagher’s social media posts. On Friday she took to X to announce that she was proud of introducing the digital ID bill, declaring it secure, convenient and not compulsory. Senator Gallagher’s post racked up a million views, many of which were from Australians gobsmacked that the minister blocked all comments on her post. So much for this Labor government’s promised accountability and transparency. I guess the minister knew that, if she allowed comments, Australians would have easily debunked the misleading claims that a digital ID would be secure and not compulsory. Despite the censorship, Community Notes—the people’s fact check—were added to the post, debunking the minister’s claims. These Community Notes have mysteriously disappeared and reappeared over the weekend, making us ask whether the government applied any pressure on X to have them removed. We know that the departments of home affairs and health pressured social media to remove COVID related posts. We know that the Department of Defence asked social media to remove posts critical of the Chief of the Defence Force. It’s not a stretch to imagine that the government has done the exact same thing here.
The idea that the government can keep any data secure is a farce. As I illustrated in my questions, government departments are our country’s most frequent perpetrators of data leaks. We know that digital ID will, effectively, be compulsory. The government says people won’t be forced to have it, unless of course people want to access government services, get a driver’s licence or enter some buildings. Just like the COVID jabs, digital ID won’t be compulsory, they tell us, yet the government will make people get one to participate in society—to live. One Nation will continue fighting the dystopian digital ID and government censorship on every front.
Question agreed to.
Thank you for your diligent work on behalf of all Australians
If a business suffers a data breach and loses customer data that business is liable. Will the government of the day be liable should the mygovid system be breached as it certainly will? And will the minister responsible have to cough up the money rather than the long-suffering taxpayer.
It seems to me that we are being forced into controlled boxes where the government can decide for us what we are permitted to do, say, think, where we can spend our money, on what and where. Australia is headed for some dire times.
It is laughable for senator Gallagher to say that MygovID is totally different and separate to Mygov. Not for one minute do I believe this. Just as they linked Centrelink & Medicare to Mygov, you can guarantee the ID will be linked up. So sick and tired of cameras everywhere you go, even in your face at supermarkets, I can’t even pick up a parcel at a shop without going through an app you have to download, the bank wouldn’t even accept my granddaughter’s piggy bank coins unless she bagged and counted it. Went to park in Breakfast Creek the other day, could only pay parking by an app. Or phone them ,which we did & message said they were busy, to try later!