Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(2) acknowledges:

(a) the release of the myGov User Audit, which stated that the previous Government's investment in the platform was 'well-crafted and implemented' and 'put in place much needed building blocks for a better myGov';

(b) that there has only been a single gathering of the Data and Digital Ministers' Meeting since the election of this Government;

(c) the previous Government's efforts to progress the implementation of digital identity by introducing the Trusted Digital Identity Bill 2021; and

(d) that the myGov User Audit calls on the Government to 'urgently' legislate on a national identity framework; and

(3) calls on the Government to prioritise digital transformation across Services Australia and national digital identity, making service delivery safer, simpler and more seamless.

I rise to speak on the importance of government services, more than ever, in the digital age, and I say at the outset just how impressed I have been from afar, as a southerner from Victoria, by Victor Dominello, the New South Wales Minister for Customer Service and Digital Government. Whenever he would post about a new way of the people of New South Wales interacting with digital services, people would say, 'Why didn't we think of that before?' Whether it was birth certificates or marriage certificates, his focus was always on customer service—that it was easy and that it made sense. So I just want to congratulate him and his team for leading the way in Australia for the last few years, and I wish him and his family the very best.

Whether it be small business owners, students or retirees, constituents in my electorate and, I'm sure, in many others constantly raise concerns regarding their data and how it is managed, and that's a concern that's raised across the community and in all ages, from individuals and families to small businesses. Recent large-scale cyber incidents affecting Optus and Medibank have only further underlined the importance of maintaining safe and secure digital credentials. That is why the Albanese government must prioritise a secure, more simple and more seamless transition across Services Australia.

The government have confirmed their intention to introduce legislation later this year and expand digital identity. The opposition will consider this legislation when it is available and will consult appropriately with the government, the community and private sectors. When in government—and, again, I and the member for Casey weren't part of it, but we are proud Liberals—this side of the chamber launched a major feature to support Australians in accessing the services and payments they needed, including the following: allowing the use of the myGov login to access agency services directly, introducing two-factor authentication through the myGov code generator, and launching the myGov ID.

Prior to the last election, the coalition government introduced an exposure draft for the Trusted Digital Identity Bill as part of the expansion of Australia's digital ID system. The purpose of this bill was a simple one. It was to enable the private sector and governments to participate in the digital ID system whilst also establishing a new consumer safeguards and government arrangements program. There was extensive public consultation about the legislation, but it wasn't able to be enacted in time.

While the coalition welcomes the release of the myGov user audit, which was published in January, the government has still not provided a formal response to the audit despite that being an election commitment. The chair of the myGov user audit, Mr David Thodey AM, and his fellow panel members are to be congratulated on their work. This is in sharp contrast to the government. The review is a vindication of the coalition's digital-first approach to digital service delivery. The audit makes clear that the previous government invested over $200 million in the enhanced myGov program and put in place much-needed building blocks for a better myGov. Whilst this was vital in getting government services to where they are today, the audit made clear that a sustained long-term investment is now required to improve myGov.

One of the first acts of this government has been to, in effect, abolish the Digital Transformation Agency, which had served as a vehicle to drive digital service delivery under the coalition, and that is disappointing. With around one million logins every day, myGov is indispensable. It is how Australians connect with vital agencies such as Centrelink, the ATO and Medicare. There is an obvious need for government services to become more user friendly, and it shouldn't have to be the case that you need a representative, a family member or—for some—even a lawyer to access digital services.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Menzies for this motion. I am disappointed that in his speech he didn't touch on how this is just another mess that his government—his government—created and that the Albanese government is tasked with cleaning up after that floundering wasted decade. The member for Menzies talked about a vehicle to drive delivery but he didn't mention that the vehicle the Albanese government saw has four flat tyres, no petrol and is unregistered.

Australians were left vulnerable and unprepared for the cybersecurity threats and attacks that we saw last year. That's the reality. That conga line of the Abbott-Morrison-Turnbull governments didn't get it about digital identity and, as a result, about half of the population cannot obtain high levels of identity proofing. The Albanese government—we accept what we were handed—will get on with fixing this. We'll work with the states and territories to allow the use of driver's licences and proof-of-age cards to allow those left out until now to obtain the high level of proof.

I now wish to point out a few inaccuracies in the member for Menzies' motion. For starters, there has been more than one meeting of the data and digital ministers. One was held a month ago in an obscure city called Melbourne, for the benefit for the member of Menzies. I believe that is in Victoria. In attendance were ministers Shorten and Gallagher along with the relevant ministers from Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory. At that meeting, the ministers agreed to actively explore ways to support the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-2032. Ministers will work with the women's safety ministers to identify opportunities to improve data sharing and advance a whole-of-society solution to end gender based violence in one generation.

Again, I point out that the Albanese government believes in working with the states to deliver practical outcomes for Australians. We're not one for hollow photo ops and symbolic stunts. Real change is actually our motto. We'll leave the Liberals and Nationals to fight it out with the Greens, One Nation, and I include the Teals obviously—for those showy stunts!

The next issue I have with this motion is its lauding of the ambitiously titled Trusted Digital Identity Framework. The framework was introduced seven years ago and there is still only the one identity provider. The audit pointed out that the situation is still poor for so many Australians, hardly the glowing endorsement the member for Menzies thinks it is. Currently, many Australians are excluded from setting up a digital identity. Almost half of the citizens of this land don't hold an Australian passport and cannot get a strong digital identity. People without identity documents, such as the 200,000 First Nations people without a birth certificate, cannot set up a standard digital identity. Even more people cannot use it if their identity documents do not match, nor can people who do not have their own mobile device. I'm not sure if the member sees the irony in this, applauding a scheme which fails to assist almost half of the population.

Lastly, the motion calls on the government to urgently legislate on a national identity framework. Wow, they're really reaching peak irony levels here. No wonder we need to act on this, because those opposite failed to do it when in government for that last wasted, wandering decade. Yet the member for Menzies has the gall to complain about a lack of action when inaction was actually the raison d'etre for the conga line of Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison governments.

The Albanese government will work with the states and territories and get on with the job of progressing to a modern identification system that will assist the vast majority of Australians. That's what this government is all about: getting the jobs done, cleaning up the mess left by those in the previous government.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moreton—my good friend, and I do respect him a lot, he's got a lot of ability on the soccer field that's for sure—did just mention the meeting of digital ministers in Melbourne. Melbourne is a great town. It's my home town. Although I note with interest that at that meeting of national digital ministers the two government ministers that attended were the Minister for Social Services and the Minister for Finance, by the member for Moreton's own words, and that in essence is the challenge and the issue that we have. This government does not have a minister for the digital economy. This is something that I've spoken about a lot. This government has a minister for the republic—and I'm not here to make a statement on whether the republic is a good or a bad thing, but it's fascinating that they've got a minister when that's not on the agenda. There isn't a referendum this term, as far as I know. It's all about priorities. This government wants to have a minister for the republic, but, as I said, they won't invest in a minister for the digital economy, and that's why I've continued to call on this government to change and admit that they've made a mistake and put someone in this place.

It's about improving the digital technology. The myGov app is an example. It delivers productivity gains for all Australians. Out in Casey we're fortunate to have a rich agricultural community. The farmers benefit from having technology—for example, drones to look at their crops. Tradies benefit by being able to do their paperwork electronically and not have to write it out. There are a lot of gains.

Just three days ago, the Productivity Commission made its five-year productivity inquiry report publicly available. This is a vital report. It's over 1,000 pages. It looks at opportunities for increased productivity to drive economic growth. And that report had some interesting things to say about the digital economy. I'm going to repeat a few quotes. I quote here:

New approaches, such as digital technologies and the better use of data (through artificial intelligence, for example) hold great promise for broadly based productivity gains, including in services.

It also states:

…the uplift in online capacity (among both businesses and households) combined with a broader embrace of the innovative potential of digital technology, can transform the way the economy operates—services in particular—with significant productivity benefits.

As our economy continues to evolve, and to feel the impacts of COVID-19, it can increase our digital capacity and it can lead to productivity gains.

I was working in the digital and tech sector when COVID hit. About two weeks into the start of the pandemic our CEO, Ray, based in Toronto, said to us—and he was right—'In the next 10 weeks we will see a transformation in digital that we thought would take 10 years' and that's what has happened. We're at a unique opportunity to take advantage of these opportunities that have come out of COVID. Yet this government has not invested in a minister for the digital economy. Clearly state governments have invested, because this government is holding meetings with those ministers. I can imagine that meeting, where all of the ministers for the digital economy turn up and the Minister for Social Services and the Minister for Finance are there—and that's not a criticism of them, but it's a criticism of Anthony Albanese and the Labor government. They don't understand the significance of this opportunity. You need a minister to set out an overall strategy.

The former government had the 2030 digital strategy. Senator Jane Hume set out those priorities of how we could take advantage of the digital economy but also mitigate some of the threats. We did talk about the cybersecurity threat—and we have seen that through Optus, through Medibank and through Latitude just this week. There are clear risks involved as we transition and continue to transition to the digital economy. But there are great opportunities and the Productivity Commission inquiry have outlined those.

It's also why I've also called for the introduction of a technological assessment office, similar to the PBO, so that we as parliamentarians can get support and information about technology, papers on emerging trends, so we can make sure we're at the forefront of what's happening, because the legislation we make in this place impacts what happens. The reality is that the speed at which the digital economy moves, the speed at which technology moves, far outpaces how we work as governments in terms of legislation. A body like a technological assessment office will go some way to closing that gap, allowing us as MPs to have up-to-date information on current technological trends and the impacts that'll have on society.

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just like my friend the member for Moreton, I'd also like to make a contribution to the motion on digital identity moved by the member for Menzies. From my experiences so far with private members' business on Mondays in this place, we often see motions put up by those opposite that require a certain degree of rhetorical gymnastics and, like many good literary works, require the reader or the audience to exercise some suspension of disbelief. Many of the motions put up by those opposite—including, to an extent, the motion by the member for Menzies—start with self-congratulation, saying how good the previous government was. This particular motion notes how great the previous government was for, of all things, myGov. Then we are asked to suspend our disbelief for a moment in the lead-up to a great crescendo: despite how great the previous government was with myGov, why isn't the Albanese government fixing the mess? It is a tried and true format, I must say.

This is why I, along with the member for Moreton and others on this side of the chamber, come here on Mondays, to set the record straight. We take a certain degree of umbrage with those opposite in their efforts to be historical revisionists. I can only suspend my disbelief to a certain extent. The member's motion notes there has been only a single meeting of the data and digital ministers since the election of the Albanese Labor government. Given that notice of this motion was given on 7 March, I'm sure the member for Menzies would be delighted to know that the data and digital ministers met an additional time a few weeks prior to that, on 24 February, in Melbourne, with quite a healthy agenda to discuss.

Putting the lie aside for a moment, I'm sure he knows and appreciates this already. But, for the sake of disclosure, I have a great respect for the member for Menzies, as we are co-chairs of the Parliamentary Friends of Veterans, and I do commend the member for Menzies for moving a motion concerning myGov. But digital delivery of government services and digital identity are indeed very important areas of public policy. For millions of Australians myGov is, for better or worse, considered an inevitability of life. It is a platform linking the service delivery platforms of a number of government services, such as the ATO, Centrelink, child support, Medicare and the DVA, to name just a few. Even the stragglers—from those who are a little unfamiliar with using technology all the way to those who proudly call themselves Luddites—saw the intrinsic value in accessing government services through this platform and the necessity to do so during the COVID-19 pandemic, when, as we all well know, face-to-face service delivery was severely hampered and was increasingly unsafe for staff and patrons alike.

That is why the previous government put their best and brightest on the case. This may very well have been the case, but unfortunately their best and brightest was the member for Fadden. Between events that he would later be discussing before a royal commission concerning robodebt, the member for Fadden had charge of the Digital Transformation Agency. It was where we got such inspirational moments where he blamed hackers—a distributed denial of service, or DDoS, attack—for why myGov crashed nationally at a time when people needed most. Thankfully, an election result brought a halt to the constant trend of the member for Fadden failing upward, and the other Minister for Government Services and Minister for Finance can enact positive reforms to myGov.

As the member for Menzies notes, their efforts were described as putting building blocks in place for a better myGov. A school report card would read 'needs improvement'. I guess the magic of it is in the inflection of how you say it.

The other part of the member's motion calls on the government in a very similar fashion to a media release I read from the member for Bradfield upon the release of the myGov user audit. It calls on the Minister for Government Services and the Albanese government to urgently legislate for a national identity framework. It leaves an air of speculation in my bones as to why the Albanese government didn't introduce and pass the Trusted Digital Identity Bill 2021. That's right, in 2021 those opposite were in government. Like many pieces of legislation, the bill didn't lapse when parliament prorogued; the bill died of exposure, sitting there patiently as an exposure draft. I can fondly recall a certain Senator Antic denouncing this bill on The Bolt Report between denouncing whichever ice cream has become woke according to posts he's read on Telegram—the important things that matter in public life.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to join with the member for Menzies and the member for Casey in speaking to this important motion. I want to particularly congratulate the member for Menzies for moving this important motion in relation to the myGov user audit and the broader question of digital government service delivery.

The opposition certainly welcomes the release of the myGov user audit led by distinguished Australian David Thodey AO, a former chief executive of Telstra, a former senior executive at IBM and somebody who brings highly relevant perspectives to these issues. The audit makes the compelling case that myGov, Australia's largest digital authenticated platform, is critical national infrastructure. There is no doubt that the cost-of-living crisis presently facing Australians only increases the importance of an efficient delivery of digital government services including through myGov. It is very important, therefore, that this audit not be allowed to gather dust on the bookshelf of the Minister for Government Services—somebody who, throughout his career, has not shown enormous enthusiasm for the whole notion of customer service. In order to realise the objectives of the audit it would be important that the government deliver an appropriate level of both commitment and financial investment.

I want to start by making the point that the reason we have before us as a parliament and as a nation considerable opportunities to improve and enhance the delivery of digital services is because of the foundational work that the previous coalition government did. Indeed the former coalition government had a very strong commitment to digital transformation and to the delivery of digital services. Under our leadership we launched major features of myGov, including allowing the use of the myGov login to access agency services directly, the introduction of two-factor authentication through the myGov code generator, and of course the launch of the myGov ID. These are important abilities which form the very foundation of myGov.

The audit arrives at, in my view, a measured and appropriate assessment of the work done by the previous government, including the investment of over $200 million in the Enhanced myGov program, making the observation that the previous government's program 'put in place much needed building blocks for a better myGov'. When asked during Senate estimates about whether the current government agreed with the assessment made by the audit about the importance of the investment in myGov made by the previous coalition government, the minister representing Minister Shorten said he gave 'credit where credit is due'. I think that is an appropriately high-minded recognition that some things are about politics, and delivering outstanding government services using digital channels ought to be part of that.

I am aware that the previous speaker made some comments about digital identity. It is very important that the work done by the previous government in relation to digital identity continues to be built upon. We did release an exposure draft for the Trusted Digital Identity Bill 2021, and the intention of that was to commence a policy process under which myGov ID could be used by state government service delivery agencies and the private sector. Unfortunately we've seen a considerable degree of lethargy, bordering on indolence, from the current government in relation to taking this matter forward.

It was interesting to see that the Productivity Commission, in its magisterial report released on Friday, highlighted the importance of continued progress when it comes to digital identity and the very significant productivity and efficiency benefits that can be achieved through the economy-wide use of digital identity. One of the other significant benefits it would deliver is to greatly reduce the risk of citizens or customers becoming the victims of cyberattacks on large corporates, because it would be possible to establish an account with your bank, with your telco and with your insurance company through the use of your trusted digital identity rather than through providing a wider array of individual identity documents.

The prize is very significant for citizens, and I urge the Albanese Labor government to build on the progress that the previous government was making when it comes to digital identity and digital service delivery.

Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to 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.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Sitting suspended from 13:31 to