Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I've seen firsthand how effective digital government can make a difference in people's lives. When the floods ripped through Maribyrnong in my electorate not long ago, many people's lives were turned upside down and they relied upon timely access to emergency payments from the Commonwealth government. It was through their myGov portal that people were accessing those payments in a timely way. When I was doorknocking and talking to people, I was seeing in real time how people were accessing myGov on their mobile phones, and how within half an hour they saw the government's emergency payments appearing in their bank accounts. So I am one of the members of this place who very much believes in the power of digital government and has seen it work in practice.

This motion, despite the claims of the previous member opposite, is not some kind of high-minded bipartisan attempt to talk about the benefits of a digital government, moving forward. Rather, it is a ridiculous, inaccurate attempt to portray the previous government as having made great progress, and this government not building on their vast legacy.

Context is all-important here. If you look at this motion in a vacuum it might seem to make some kind of sense. But it's a classic example of over-egging the previous government, cherrypicking from a rigorous report and completely misrepresenting what's actually going on. Let's look, for example, at the fact that this motion is based upon cherrypicking one sentence out of this report that says something mildly positive about the previous government. Let's look at finding 10—which they don't put in this motion, strangely enough:

Past failures to adequately address three systemic issues have undermined delivery of high quality, citizen-centric services:

a. the structure and responsibilities of government do not encourage agencies to join up services for Australians

b. myGov has been funded, planned and governed as a standard IT project, instead of essential national infrastructure

c. 'Fixing myGov' means also fixing things beyond myGov, including the quality of broader government digital, telephone and face-to-face services.

The fact that finding 10c refers to the need to fix myGov is exactly where we find ourselves, as in so many other areas of government activity, we're fixing the mess we've inherited from those opposite. So they cherrypick one sentence out of a massive report, and here's just one example of a finding that talks about the previous government's failure to deal with a number of systemic issues.

This motion also calls upon the government to undertake reforms in this area with more urgency. Again, a little bit of context might be relevant here. The digital ID system was initiated by the previous Commonwealth government in 2015. And what we found ourselves facing was a draft bill in October 2021. If people listening to this, and there may not be hordes, want to do the maths on that they'll find that's six years to come up with a draft bill. And might I say, the bill was introduced into parliament right at the point of an election being imminent. Then we came into government with no piece of legislation having been voted on—a vacuum.

Those opposite have this motion calling on urgency from us. They were in government for almost a decade, they identified the issue and they spent over six years coming up with a draft bill. At least they put it into the chamber—unlike the anticorruption bill, which they decided to put out into the community for broader consultation. In 2022, seven years after this issue was first raised, we found ourselves with no bill having been voted on by the previous government. Again, we're dealing with their mess. It is beyond ironic that they would come in here with a motion calling for more urgency after their glacial speed.

They call for the need for greater intergovernmental cooperation. All relevant ministers did meet on 24 February. They did endorse, in principle, the draft national strategy for identity resilience. This is going to complement the developing of a cybersecurity strategy more broadly. When we talk about the need for digital government and for safety, it's worth mentioning that the Minister for Cyber Security, Hon. Clare O'Neil, was named the 2022 Cybersecurity Person of the Year by Cybercrime Magazine. It is an area in which almost nothing was done for a decade, and now we're taking up the running at warp speed.

I think we do to a degree share a concern about digital government across the chamber, but I certainly would not agree with their characterisation of their achievements or of what's going on right now.

See this speech in context