Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Warfare in the 21^st century is often conducted in the realm of cyberspace.

Despite the growing concerns about cyber-methods and digitised infrastructure, the WEF is still encouraging a Digital ID system. The Digital ID infrastructure is now at Australia’s coastal doorstep.

The Digital ID Bill 2023 was tabled in parliament on the 30th of November, and it has vigilant citizens across the nation seriously concerned.

‘Digital ID’, in short, refers to the economy of private information that will be uploaded, held and used by various institutions (both domestic and foreign) to supposedly create greater ‘efficiency’ in a rapidly developing world.

It is touted as the next ‘big development’ in the Build Back Better community of Great Reset promoters, allied with the likes of the World Economic Forum that have been sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party’s Belt and Road initiative.

Concerns

With any new technological development, central to its use should be a critical analysis of the ramifications of this framework inherently fraught with privacy issues and national security concerns. Section 160 of the bill is frankly worrying.

Section 160 is poorly drafted and demonstrates little concern over Australia’s national security as it limits civil penalties for those who contravene a civil penalty provision of the Act if the conduct occurs wholly in a foreign country.

It is important to ask who is behind the proposal of a globalised digital ID system, what sort of data will be stored in the infrastructure and how secure will it be — what happens with all the data?

The bill is being promoted by Labor, which has blatant associations with the Chinese Communist Party.

It is worth asking what the legal ramifications are — how does the digital ID system fit with existing privacy law or human rights? Is it compatible with the notion of a truly democratic and free society, or will it set the stage up for further surveillance and government encroachment on civilian life?

Section 79 of the digital ID exposure draft protects entities participating in the digital ID system from liability. It is broad and negligently drafted, which shows the government’s lax disregard for privacy concerns and protections.

The draft of the bill also outlines what kinds of data can be collected if passed into law. The scope of the data in question is enormous — and it includes biometrics.

Biometric data within the bill is defined as the following: ‘biometric information means information about any measurable biological characteristic relating to an individual that could be used to identify the individual’. An accredited entity may collect this data from citizens and disclose it, with consent, they say. If certain fundamental services are withheld from individuals unless they consent to a digital ID, this ‘protective’ provision is rendered completely useless.

Worrying Scenarios

The contents page of the bill should be enough to raise the alarm about potential issues with the infrastructure — there are monetary penalties for those who misuse data for marketing purposes. This indicates that digitised ID and data can be hacked and used for malevolent activities.

Imagine if the Chinese Communist Party for example, got their hands on data through the conduit of an accredited entity that has access to private information. The CCP already have tentacles in several of Australia’s institutions, following the discovery of the Thousand Talents Plan, proving the reality that there are currently agents of the CCP displaced right across the globe — and some of them are working in sensitive industries.

One of the objectives of the bill, according to the first ‘provision’ in the exposure draft, is to verify the identity of individuals in online transactions concerning the government and businesses. The first problem with this method is that it will inherently require data to be collected by public or private entities. Not all private businesses within Australia are even Australian-owned, or secure.

The second objective of the bill is to promote the advancement of trust in digital ID services, which indicates an existing lack of trust within the community.

Arguably, there is distrust as there are issues with allowing businesses and entities access to personal data they normally would not have access to.

The ID framework itself means digital transactions will be surveilled even more heavily than they currently are. A society of 1984-style surveillance paves the way towards a social credit system. You see surveillance methods used during communist incrementation throughout history.

The bill includes objectives indicating the system is ‘voluntary.’

___

Originally published at The Spectator Australia. Photo by Reiner SCT.