‘No previous Australian government, even in wartime…’

Under 16s Social Media Ban - It’s Not What it Seems: Lessons from Access Card

At the time when many of the current political proponents of the Under 16s social media ban were in another universe, there was an almighty fight back in 2006/2007 over the Health and Human Services Access Card, and what it was really about.

That was almost 20 years ago. The lessons from Access Card have never been investigated. Interesting isn’t it?

I was the Chief Technology Architect of the Health and Human Services Access Card. For many years the Chief Technology Architect of the Department of Human Services, responsible for the technology business cases bringing together the massive systems of Centrelink, Medicare and Child Support Agency under what was called at the time, Service Delivery Reform. I was also responsible for initiating Payment Delivery Reform.

First hand experience is both a brutal and a kind teacher. Theory always falls away in the face of experience.

The lesson from Access Card is that things are not always what they appear on the surface, the risk of function creep is an insidious threat to democracy, usually premised on the need to crack down on fraud and the threat of bad things happening. The temptation of function creep is irresistible in a deskilled environment eager to please political masters. (Remember RoboDebt?)

One day, I will write the full story of Access Card. I’m just a bit busy at the moment writing other books.

So this little article will have to suffice for now, and I hope that some of the political decision makers contemplating the Under 16s ban will pause - there is no need to rush - because once in place, the monster is unleashed.

Banning social media does not fix its issues. And there is no practical way to implement it and police it. As with Access Card, this is not what it seems. This is an apparent election winning strategy requiring all Australian voters to provide their ID to big tech companies to prove they’re over 16 so they can use the Internet.

The Access Card Bill Report

I refer readers to the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration Report on the provisions of the Human Services (Enhanced Service Delivery) Bill 2007 [Provisions] (Access Card bill), dated March 2007. It's great reading.

👇👇 👇

‘No previous Australian government, even in wartime, has effectively required all its citizens to give it a physical representation of themselves, nor contemplated having this stored in one national database.’

The LNP Government’s own committee, rejected the Access Card bill. Why?

The following select references from the Report tell the story.

‘It is an object of the bill that the access card cannot be used as, or become, a national identity card.’

Not an Identity Card? But wait…

‘3.32 The Government has given assurances that the access card is not intended as a national identity card.

'In this regard, the Committee has taken particular note of the Taskforce's view…most Australians are eligible for Medicare, so even those who do not make regular use of Medicare services are likely to find that at some time in their lives, for example when they start a family or when they reach a certain age or degree of infirmity, they will need to access Medicare. To do so they will need an access card. To this extent, the Taskforce recognises that, at some stage, almost every Australian is likely to need an access card and as such to become a person registered in the Secure Customer Registration Service.’

‘3.42 Thus, it is argued that there is potential for the access card to evolve into an ID card if a biometric photo, signature and serial number are visible on the face of the card. However, this might contravene the government's explicit declaration in clause 6 that 'access cards are not to be used as, and do not become, national identity cards'.

...likely to evolve into an ID card

Beware of the unknown and such a population-wide intervention being rushed…

‘In essence, the Committee is being asked to approve the implementation of the access card on blind faith without full knowledge of the details or implications of the program. This is inimical to good law-making. The delay in introducing these measures is unlikely to encourage public confidence in the access card proposal, particularly as the missing measures are essential for providing the checks and balances needed to address serious concerns about the bill.’

Blind Faith. Why the rush? The importance of Review and Community Consultation

‘3.12 In addition, two tender processes, one for the systems integrator, the other for card issuance and management, were running during the Committee's consideration of the matter. This could be seen as undermining the authority of the Committee by creating the impression that passage of this legislation is preordained, rendering Senate oversight superfluous.’

‘3.15 The Committee cannot accept that priority has been given to tender processes at the expense of reasonable time for the Parliament to scrutinise properly a complex piece of legislation.’

Professor Alan Fels gave strong evidence on maximising Parliamentary review processes…

‘3.104 The Fels' Taskforce was also of the view that to enhance public support for the access card scheme and win acceptance of it, decisions related to the register should be reviewable by the Parliament. Professor Fels told the Committee that in considering the question of safeguards:

‘… I would suggest that one should err on the side of caution in this matter in terms of maximising the parliamentary review processes and appeals and so on.’

'Conclusion:

'3.107 The establishment of the register is a new measure of national significance with far reaching implications for the privacy and security of most Australians' personal data. It is vital that the necessary level of transparency and oversight is also established to monitor its use. The current bill does not provide these necessary mechanisms.’ [My emphasis added]

Sounds familiar? The current bill does not provide these necessary mechanisms.

But History Repeats Itself. Again

ALP SENATORS' ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE ACCESS CARD REPORT.

‘The arrogance of the Government’s position is also reflected in the comments by the former Minister in the Second Reading Speech who labelled persons opposing or expressing serious concerns about the measures in the Bill as 'friends of fraud'.

‘This is a despicable attack upon many reputable organisations and persons. For instance, organisations such as the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, the Australian Medical Association, Carers Australia, the Federation of Ethnic Communities Council of Australia, the Australian Banker’s Association, Liberty Victoria, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, Legacy, MedicAlert and Vision Australia appeared during the public hearings and raised significant concerns with the legislation.’

‘It seems that the Government is intent on bludgeoning this legislation through and maligning its critics, rather than allowing a proper debate on the merits and detail of the access card legislation.’

Under 16s Social Media Ban: What’s the Rush?

Every Australian citizen will have to provide their ID to big tech companies to prove they’re over 16 so they can use the Internet.

My previous commentary on LinkedIn.

Sending a gold mine of ID theft material to unregulated tech bros - absolutely genius💡

Letting Big Tech have our kids’ ID data. What could possibly go wrong?

Remember, this is the government and bureaucracy that has the sadim touch with technology - ie everything that is touched is f*cked. Some call it the “Sexy Fingers” effect.

Worried? At the very least, heed the lessons of history.

Consult and don’t rush.