Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Forshaw is right in the sense that this is an issue we should look at very closely. Certainly, the card has many advantages. It has potential disadvantages as well. It is a difficult issue. What we should not allow to happen, Senator Forshaw, is the rhetoric of privacy to overshadow the debate. We should have a proper debate over the issue, and look at the safeguards.

I think the two aims of this card are, firstly, to combat fraud and, secondly, to improve access. They are both worthy aims. I think both sides of parliament agree with the aims of the process. Combating fraud is an issue of social justice—people should not be able to claim benefits they are not entitled to. Benefits should go to those people who are entitled to them and who need them. In relation to improving access, again I suspect that all senators would agree that access should be improved. There are difficulties at times with people gaining access. I remember last year when the cyclone hit Far North Queensland. People did not have access to welfare, and this access card would have made it easier.

So in a sense we are not really arguing about the aims. I think all senators agree that the aims are appropriate. It is whether the safeguards are sufficient. Those safeguards have been gauged in three locales over the last 12 to 18 months. The consultation has taken three forms. First of all, there has been the independent committee chaired by Professor Fels. That task force has reported twice and the government will continue its consultations with those interested groups to ensure that the implementation of the access card meets the needs and the expectations of all Australians. To date, Professor Fels has undertaken over 160 consultations and has received more than 100 submissions. This is a big-time report. He has looked at it objectively and he has reported to the government.

The access card website has received over 500 email comments from members of the public. The access card information hotline has received over 1,800 calls and there have been ongoing briefings to stakeholder groups and the media. The Fels report is on the web. It has been an excellent summation of the issues.

Secondly, and my friend Senator Forshaw mentioned this, the debate has already commenced in Senate estimates. We did not breach Senate standing orders by debating the legislation; we did look at the process. I accept that there are issues that we have to address. But let us not let the privacy rhetoric and the scaremongering get the better of us. Let us actually have a look and see whether those two aims—of deterring fraud and of improving access—can be achieved with safety and security of privacy. That is really the good public policy issue here.