A Digital Identity?
Not for me thank you
Barbara Olive
How many times have previous Governments tried to introduce an Identity Card.
The first time The Australia Card was introduced as a possibility was in 1985, it was eventually vehemently opposed by The Australian people and finally abandoned in 1987.
The Canberra Times published an article on 13 December 1986 by Andrew Fraser citing the ALP backbencher Lewis Kent as having said, “Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitler card or Stalin card.[1]
Moving on From 1987 On the ABC Radio Programme The World Today on Monday 18 July 2005 where a National ID card was being discussed. John Howard a former Prime Minister was heard to have said 20 years earlier when the card was first proposed
“When you realise that the assumption of the Australia Card legislation is that every Australian is a cheat, when you realise that it involves establishing a level of intrusion of a draconian kind into the day to day activities of many people and when people really read and understand the legislation, I believe that the support that some people feel, particularly in the ranks of the Government for this proposal, is going to disappear.”[2]
Like many proposals by the Government the people are not included in the decision making process. In 1985 initially the population mostly thought an ID Card was a good idea until it was pointed out what was actually being proposed. This was put to the people as a one off, needed to determine your identity like your Driving License. But it was to be open ended and could be used for any means of tracking your every movement, physically, financially, socially, politically and medically, garnering every minute detail of your health status.
Todays Government is a somewhat silent conversation with the public. Most of the information the Government want the people to hear is sent via media releases to the Main Stream Media and is possibly questioned at Press Conferences, if allowed. The Public have no right of reply anymore. MSM journalists are hampered in what they are reporting according to the Medias sponsors or advertisers. This behaviour is diametrically opposed to the actual remit of a journalist, which is to report “The Truth”.[3] I like the link I’ve just given you but it’s from the USA it’s unambiguous. I’ve looked for a similar Australian Ethics code, I can’t find one that’s not to say it doesn’t exist, I just don’t want to spend most of the research time on this article about journalists ethics. It is after all about your right to refuse a Digital Identity.
And therein lies the problem.
NO PUBLIC AWARENESS OF THIS BILL
Since 1985 we have experienced a technological revolution. A lot of what we engage in is online. And if you’re not searching for this topic you won’t find it.
Most people turn on the computer or tablet to go onto Social Media to find out what their friends are up to. Buy an item or pay a bill, or possibly renew something like their Drivers License or Professional dues. Not many use the computer to research for a dissertation, thesis or article. I do.
This Digital Identity Bill package[4], which I stumbled across this morning, highlights the problem in its entirety. It has passed 2 sittings already. Do the public know about it – No, I doubt it. But I am making it my mission to let them know and to refuse the option by saying no.
This is a great marketing ploy; no doubt one Mr Morrison has brought with him from his days in Marketing. I especially like the change of conversation to add Trusted to the Title half way through the website, to give the unsuspecting general public the “warm and fuzzies”
The public only have until Wednesday 27th October 2021 to have their say. The rules of engagement here are
“if you don’t respond to this the Government will take this
“no response” as it’s OK to pass this bill.”
MY WORDS
Obviously the Memo to MSM went missing about this subject and proposed Bill.
WE ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO “TRUSTED” SOURCES
The YouTube video is only telling the public what you want them to hear. It’s all in one place and no passwords to remember.
We already have this with a My Gov Account for Medicare, Centrelink, ATO, My health Record and DVA to name but a few of the services. One login one password and verified by a code sent to your phone.
So what are you NOT telling us the unsuspecting public?
Because there’s an awful lot of holes in this as it relates to what other “Trusted Agents” will have access to your information and who can use it,
This reminds me somewhat of a comment from my Ex during our divorce. I didn’t lie to you I just left out the information.
Yes I think John Howard summed it up perfectly when he said and I'll post it again
“When you realise that the assumption of the Australia Card legislation is that every Australian is a cheat, when you realise that it involves establishing a level of intrusion of a draconian kind into the day to day activities of many people and when people really read and understand the legislation, I believe that the support that some people feel, particularly in the ranks of the Government for this proposal, is going to disappear.”[5]
This whole Government debacle assumes the Australian population in their entirety are cheats. Sorry I thought a Democratic Nation was a Government for the people by the people.
Wake up, whoever is reading this submission, public servants, anyone who works, anyone who takes a pension, anyone who draws breath. This Government, as previous Governments have tried before are trying their hardest to turn this country into a totalitarian dystopian state, where the people have no say in who their Government are and how the country is run.
NO , my answer is a loud NO. What other countries think of their people as the enemy or to use their subjects as numbers only to provide succour to the leaders?
PLEASE GO TO THIS GOVERNMENT SITE TO HAVE YOUR SAY BEFORE THE 27th OCTOBER 2021
https://www.digitalidentity.gov.au/have-your-say/phase-3
[1] https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130634679
[2] https://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1416572.htm
[3] http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
[4] https://www.digitalidentity.gov.au/have-your-say/phase-3/submission-form
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1416572.htm
Not for me thank you
Barbara Olive
How many times have previous Governments tried to introduce an Identity Card.
The first time The Australia Card was introduced as a possibility was in 1985, it was eventually vehemently opposed by The Australian people and finally abandoned in 1987.
The Canberra Times published an article on 13 December 1986 by Andrew Fraser citing the ALP backbencher Lewis Kent as having said, “Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitler card or Stalin card.[1]
Moving on From 1987 On the ABC Radio Programme The World Today on Monday 18 July 2005 where a National ID card was being discussed. John Howard a former Prime Minister was heard to have said 20 years earlier when the card was first proposed
“When you realise that the assumption of the Australia Card legislation is that every Australian is a cheat, when you realise that it involves establishing a level of intrusion of a draconian kind into the day to day activities of many people and when people really read and understand the legislation, I believe that the support that some people feel, particularly in the ranks of the Government for this proposal, is going to disappear.”[2]
Like many proposals by the Government the people are not included in the decision making process. In 1985 initially the population mostly thought an ID Card was a good idea until it was pointed out what was actually being proposed. This was put to the people as a one off, needed to determine your identity like your Driving License. But it was to be open ended and could be used for any means of tracking your every movement, physically, financially, socially, politically and medically, garnering every minute detail of your health status.
Todays Government is a somewhat silent conversation with the public. Most of the information the Government want the people to hear is sent via media releases to the Main Stream Media and is possibly questioned at Press Conferences, if allowed. The Public have no right of reply anymore. MSM journalists are hampered in what they are reporting according to the Medias sponsors or advertisers. This behaviour is diametrically opposed to the actual remit of a journalist, which is to report “The Truth”.[3] I like the link I’ve just given you but it’s from the USA it’s unambiguous. I’ve looked for a similar Australian Ethics code, I can’t find one that’s not to say it doesn’t exist, I just don’t want to spend most of the research time on this article about journalists ethics. It is after all about your right to refuse a Digital Identity.
And therein lies the problem.
NO PUBLIC AWARENESS OF THIS BILL
Since 1985 we have experienced a technological revolution. A lot of what we engage in is online. And if you’re not searching for this topic you won’t find it.
Most people turn on the computer or tablet to go onto Social Media to find out what their friends are up to. Buy an item or pay a bill, or possibly renew something like their Drivers License or Professional dues. Not many use the computer to research for a dissertation, thesis or article. I do.
This Digital Identity Bill package[4], which I stumbled across this morning, highlights the problem in its entirety. It has passed 2 sittings already. Do the public know about it – No, I doubt it. But I am making it my mission to let them know and to refuse the option by saying no.
This is a great marketing ploy; no doubt one Mr Morrison has brought with him from his days in Marketing. I especially like the change of conversation to add Trusted to the Title half way through the website, to give the unsuspecting general public the “warm and fuzzies”
The public only have until Wednesday 27th October 2021 to have their say. The rules of engagement here are
“if you don’t respond to this the Government will take this
“no response” as it’s OK to pass this bill.”
MY WORDS
Obviously the Memo to MSM went missing about this subject and proposed Bill.
WE ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO “TRUSTED” SOURCES
The YouTube video is only telling the public what you want them to hear. It’s all in one place and no passwords to remember.
We already have this with a My Gov Account for Medicare, Centrelink, ATO, My health Record and DVA to name but a few of the services. One login one password and verified by a code sent to your phone.
So what are you NOT telling us the unsuspecting public?
Because there’s an awful lot of holes in this as it relates to what other “Trusted Agents” will have access to your information and who can use it,
This reminds me somewhat of a comment from my Ex during our divorce. I didn’t lie to you I just left out the information.
Yes I think John Howard summed it up perfectly when he said and I'll post it again
“When you realise that the assumption of the Australia Card legislation is that every Australian is a cheat, when you realise that it involves establishing a level of intrusion of a draconian kind into the day to day activities of many people and when people really read and understand the legislation, I believe that the support that some people feel, particularly in the ranks of the Government for this proposal, is going to disappear.”[5]
This whole Government debacle assumes the Australian population in their entirety are cheats. Sorry I thought a Democratic Nation was a Government for the people by the people.
Wake up, whoever is reading this submission, public servants, anyone who works, anyone who takes a pension, anyone who draws breath. This Government, as previous Governments have tried before are trying their hardest to turn this country into a totalitarian dystopian state, where the people have no say in who their Government are and how the country is run.
NO , my answer is a loud NO. What other countries think of their people as the enemy or to use their subjects as numbers only to provide succour to the leaders?
PLEASE GO TO THIS GOVERNMENT SITE TO HAVE YOUR SAY BEFORE THE 27th OCTOBER 2021
https://www.digitalidentity.gov.au/have-your-say/phase-3
[1] https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130634679
[2] https://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1416572.htm
[3] http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
[4] https://www.digitalidentity.gov.au/have-your-say/phase-3/submission-form
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1416572.htm