Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

While Australia’s Digital ID system is being sold to us as “voluntary,” in reality, people without it will likely be deprived access to essential services.

Labor has repeatedly assured us that participation in the Digital ID system will be voluntary.

However, the practical application of the Digital ID Bill will make it difficult to access certain services without a Digital ID.

Online banking is the example given in the Bill:

“To open a bank account, ABC Bank requires new customers to verify their identity. ABC Bank allows customers to do this in person at each branch of ABC Bank or alternatively by using the bank’s online application service, which requires the use of a digital ID. Jacob wants to open a bank account with ABC Bank but he does not wish to use his digital ID to do so. Because Jacob can verify his identity by going to his nearest branch instead, ABC Bank does not contravene subsection (1).”

While the example in the Bill refers to opening new bank accounts, there’s no reason to assume this won’t apply to all online banking.

Jacob is welcome to physically go to the bank and do his banking in person, so he isn’t being “forced” to use a Digital ID. However, if Jacob does most of his banking online, and doesn’t want to use the Digital ID service, then Jacob must travel to his nearest branch.

According to Labor, nobody is forcing Jacob to do this — it’s voluntary!

Labor has said that the framework established by their recently passed Digital ID Bill will be voluntary.

However, on closer examination, it might not be as voluntary as they say.

A potential precedent of difficulty accessing certain services, including online banking, has… pic.twitter.com/BRbEEaVYt9

— Senator Alex Antic (@SenatorAntic) April 17, 2024

Digital ID: Voluntary In Name Only

There are other clauses in the Bill that provide cause for concern. Subsection (4) of section 74 states, broadly, that the Digital ID Regulator may grant an exemption, essentially allowing a Digital ID to be mandatory in some circumstances, if the Digital ID regulator is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so.

That’s hardly a comforting statement. It’s simply up to the regulator to determine whether making a Digital ID mandatory is “appropriate” or not. We need stronger protections and assurances against it becoming required to access basic services than this.

Subsection (6) of section 74 explains that government departments may not require Australians to use the Digital ID to access their services. We would not need a Digital ID to access Centrelink or obtain a driver’s license (at this stage) but there is broad scope in this Bill for minimising peoples’ ability to engage in online transactions, including when it comes to banking.

With this Digital ID Bill, we continue to tip-toe into a future in which the government exercises more control over what you can and cannot do based on your compliance with their agenda. In my view, subscribing to a government-based Digital ID service which stores your personal information and data should not be a prerequisite for online banking or shopping.

We know that online banking will become even more prominent in the years ahead and the number of physical branches and ATMs will probably decrease, potentially making it difficult to access services without this Digital ID.

It may not be “mandatory”, but it wouldn’t need to be.

124,000 Australians signed my petition calling on the Prime Minister not to pass this Bill, yet Labor pushed it through without even having a debate. This is not good enough, and I will continue to speak out against this Bill.

___

Image courtesy of Unsplash.