Small business policy and programs responsibility has been moved to Treasury from the Department of Industry as part of a Machinery of Government rearrangement.
The Administrative Arrangements Order, signed by Governor-General David Hurley late last week, includes two key changes relating to industry and innovation-focused policy, with the Digital Transformation Agency shifted to the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet from Services Australia.
The other significant change has seen the responsibility for small business policy and programs, and the Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman Act, moved from the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources to Treasury.
Minister for Employment, Workforce, Skills, Small and Family Business Stuart Robert, who was appointed in the role in late March, will retain responsibility for small business policy despite it being housed in the Treasury portfolio.
Small business policy has moved to Treasury but will remain under the control of Stuart Robert
Small business policy development is now likely to receive significant better resourcing now that it’s sitting within Treasury, which is responsible for a number of key policy areas for the sector, including competition and tax.
Following his appointment as part of the ministerial reshuffle last month, Mr Robert said support for small businesses in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic will be a key focus in his new role.
“We need to ensure the backbone of Australia’s economic prosperity – small and family business – are given every opportunity to thrive,” Mr Robert said.
The administrative arrangements order from last week omitted “small business policy and programs” from the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources’ remit, and added it to the Department of Treasury.
It also moved the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman Act 2015 to Treasury. Former Liberal Minister Bruce Billson was earlier this year appointed the new small business ombudsman, and there is currently an inquiry running into the effectiveness and efficiency of the office.
The same order also shifted responsibility for whole-of-government information and communications technology and tech procurement policy and services from the Department of Social Services to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.
This move has transferred the Digital Transformation Agency from Services Australia to Prime Minister & Cabinet, where it had resided until late 2018.
Despite the shift, Mr Robert has retained control of the DTA in his current role as employment minister.
Mr Robert has also gained a new role in the powerful Cabinet expenditure review committee, and will also keep his role as chair of the Service Delivery and Coordination committee
State, territory and Commonwealth digital ministers have agreed to press ahead with the Prime Minister’s plan for national consistent digital identity and data sharing schemes, and noted the rollout of COVID-19 vaccination certificates.
Last week, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced the federal government’s plan to greatly increase data sharing between public sector agencies and private organisations through new legislation would be expanded to state and territory governments.
On Friday, Ministers responsible for digital and data from each of Australia’s state and territory governments except Tasmania met with Commonwealth Employment Minister Stuart Robert, who has retained control of whole of government digital projects in his new portfolio.
Ministers “discussed development of the intergovernmental agreement to support national data sharing between governments” at the meeting. The agreement will eventually be considered by state and territory Premiers at National Cabinet.
States and territories are in talks for a new agreement to support national data sharing between governments.
An intergovernmental agreement paves the way for the federal government to expand its own data sharing plan to state and territory governments.
Three years in the making, the Coalition’s data sharing plan includes new legislation, the Data Transparency and Availability Act, to get around current secrecy provisions and other laws blocking data sharing by government agencies.
But the proposed laws have been criticised because of significant privacy implications, the sharing of identifiable information and the potential for consent to not always be required.
The legislation was introduced in December and immediately questioned by a group of senators about its lack of detail and privacy safeguards in the legislation. The legislation was sent to a Senate inquiry which has attracted more than 30 submissions. A report is expected by the end of the month.
State and territory ministers also agreed to a “seamless digital identity for Australians” delivered through a nationally consistent approach.
“A consistent approach to digital identity will make it easier for the Australian public to interact online across a wide range of digital services, regardless of the jurisdiction they live in or the service they are accessing,” the latest communiqué stated.
“Work is continuing between the Commonwealth, states and territories to make this a reality.”
Ministers also noted updates to the rollout of digital proof of vaccination, which can now be accessed through government apps. Ministers noted the digital proof will be an important step in the reopening of the Australian economy.
The intergovernmental data and digital Minister’s meetings began in 2018, occurring only a few times each of the first two years. But as the pandemic put pressure on service delivery last year, Ministers agreed to meet more frequently last year – nearly once a month in 2020.
Mr Robert, who began chairing the meetings in 2019, retained control of whole of government digital projects in his new portfolio through committee appointments and the move of the Digital Transformation Agency back to Prime Minister and Cabinet.
The government’s back-to-the-future decision to move the Digital Transformation Agency into the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet is a good outcome for the sector and for progress in digitization across government, according to the Australian Information Industry Association.
The shift back to a central agency would give the DTA more clout to lead digital transformation across government and to align with the work of the Digital Transformation Taskforce and other PM&C activities, the AIIA said.
The Governor-General David Hurley last week signed an administrative arrangements order with the Prime Minister shifting the DTA from its home in the Social Services portfolio back into Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Separate orders specified that newly installed Employment Minister Stuart Robert, who had been Government Services Minister until the reshuffle earlier this month, would retain responsibility for the Digital Transformation Agency.
My life as a MOG: The Digital Transformation Agency is back to PM&C
The tech industry’s peak advocacy body, the AIIA renewed a memorandum of understanding with the Digital Transformation Agency in March to continue the strong collaboration between the Australian Government and the information technology industry.
“The DTA sitting inside PM&C also means it can align to the work of the Digital Transformation Taskforce and other PM&C activities and taskforces that involve government transformation and digitization projects,” AIIA policy and advocacy general manager Simon Bush told InnovationAus.
“This will give the DTA more access and influence to lead digital government projects and provide portfolio agency advice.
“The AIIA has argued that government tech should lead in the digital transformation of the economy and not be excluded from policy and we see this shift to the centre as positive,” Mr Bush said.
Not everyone heralded the changes, with shadow minister for government services and the NDIS Bill Shorten lampooning Stuart Robert’s continued involvement in service delivery.
“After the Robodebt scandal, I would not trust Stuart Robert to run a digital calculator, let along the Digital Transformation Agency,” Mr Shorten told InnovationAus.
“It’s another chaotic change when Australians are longing for a stable government. The Government also shows it lacks faith in Linda Reynolds,” he said.
But the AIIA’s Simon Bush backed Mr Robert, saying he had been a strong advocate for the role of the DTA, and for the role of the technology sector in the economy. The AIIA welcomed the continuity of working with the same minister on digital transformation, despite Mr Robert’s shift to the Employment portfolio.
“Minister Robert has been a strong advocate and supporter of the role of DTA and its continued funding,” Mr Bush said.
“The Minister wanted to continue to have the responsibility for the DTA and we look forward to continue to have a good working relationship with him.”
“One area we look forward to working with the DTA moving forward is improving the digital skills and leadership of the APS, as well as cloud hosting, tech procurement and data policies.”
Mr Robert has cemented his imprint on whole of government digital transformation. He has retained his role as chair of the Cabinet’s important Service Delivery and Coordination Committee and been promoted to the powerful Expenditure Review Committee.
The DTA’s shift back into Prime Minister and Cabinet is a back-to-the-future move. The agency had started life in the Communications portfolio while Malcolm Turnbull was Communications Minister under then Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
The agency moved into PM&C under Malcolm Turnbull as Prime Minister – a champion of government-led service innovation as an engine for economic growth – but was then moved to the Department of Human Services within the Social Services.
That experiment has run its course, and the DTA is now shifted back to the PM&C as a central agency.
The Digital Transformation Agency has been moved to the employment portfolio and will remain under the control of Minister Stuart Robert.
An order signed by Governor-General Peter Cosgrove shifting the Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) from Services Australia to the Department of Employment was revealed late on Friday afternoon.
It’s a significant move for the DTA, which had at one point been housed within Prime Minister & Cabinet.
It means the government’s tech agency will remain under the control of Mr Robert, who was recently appointed as Minister for Employment, Workforce, Skills, Small and Family Business after serving as government services minister.
It was revealed this week that Mr Robert had retained his role as chair of the Cabinet Service Delivery and Coordination Committee despite the ministerial reshuffle. He has also recently been promoted into the powerful expenditure review committee by the Prime Minister.
Stuart Robert will retain control of the DTA
The DTA had previously been in the human services portfolio due to significant amounts of IT spending from that department, and its role in key IT projects such as myGov.
The DTA was launched in 2015, as the Digital Transformation Office, as a pet project of then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who hand-picked its inaugural chief executive in Paul Shetler.
It was originally housed in the communications department before a significant restructuring the following year saw it renamed to the DTA and moved directly under Mr Turnbull in Prime Minister & Cabinet.
In late 2018 the DTA was moved away from PM&C and into the human services portfolio, and was switched to government services in May 2019 with the launch of Services Australia.
The amendments to the Public Service Act 1999, revealed on Friday, also outline the DTA’s key functions, which have remained largely stable from previous years.
The DTA has been tasked with providing strategic and policy leadership on whole-of-government and shared ICT investments and digital service delivery, and to “develop, deliver and monitor” strategies, policies and standards for tech investment, including procurement.
It will also manage strategic coordination and oversight functions for digital and ICT investment across the life cycle of projects, manage whole-of-government digital procurement and provide advice to Minister Robert on whole-of-government digital.
The DTA is in the midst of a number of significant government tech projects currently, including the redevelopment of myGov and the whole-of-government digital identity program.
It also received widespread attention last year after leading the development of the government’s controversial COVIDSafe contact tracing app.
The DTA’s spending on contracts with tier one management consultants increased by nearly five times in the time since Mr Robert took control of the agency in May 2019. In the 2019-20 financial year, more than $30 million in contracts were handed to Deloitte, McKinsey, KPMG and the Boston Consulting Group, compared with just over $6 million in the previous year.
In the previous 18 months, the DTA also experienced close to 100 per cent staff turnover.
Despite being created by Mr Turnbull in part to bring tech expertise back inside the public sector, the DTA has become increasingly reliant on short-term contractors and consultancy firms.
Australia is racing into the next decades of the digital era wilfully blind and ill-prepared as to the impact of algorithms on its citizens.
I say wilfully blind because notwithstanding the very serious concerns and legal challenges about algorithms around the world over many years, the current Digital Transformation Strategy 2025 and the recent APS Workforce Strategy 2025 contain no reference to algorithms.
Why is this a problem?
Because of the speed with which government agencies are acquiring and applying powerful algorithm technologies, while at the same time the political mantra of “fairness” has become the very raison d’être for their use.
Marie Johnson: Sleep walking into an algorithmic miasma
The widespread application of algorithms changes the relationship between the citizen and the state: opaque algorithms enabling policies of the reverse onus-of-proof and non-appealable processes that target and impact the most disadvantaged in society.
The unlawful RoboDebt debacle and the visceral outcry from disabled people and their families over proposed NDIS RoboPlans generated from outsourced Independent Assessments, demonstrates that government is ethically ill-equipped for the era of algorithms.
In 2020 in the United Kingdom, there was outrage and political fights over the use of “unfair algorithms” to make all sorts of government decisions.
Controversially, the use of opaque algorithms to calculate the grades of secondary school students disproportionally impacted disadvantaged students who were denied access to universities. This “provoked so much public anger at its perceived unfairness…that the government was forced into an embarrassing U-turn.”
But the socio-economic discrimination problems are far bigger for both Australia and the UK alike. The UN special rapporteur for extreme poverty, Philip Alston, warns that the UK is “stumbling zombie-like into a digital welfare dystopia”. Alston argued that too often technology is being used to reduce people’s benefits, set up intrusive surveillance and generate profits for private companies.
What can be done?
Twenty-five years ago, as “government online” was gearing up, governments around the world undertook “forms and transactions” audits as a pillar of their online strategies. At the time, the Victorian Government was a globally recognised leader in government online. I undertook a number of these forms and transactions audits myself, and there is a whole other story to be told about what these audits revealed about the bowels of government.
The reason why the forms and transactions audits were undertaken, was to establish a baseline and priority for online delivery. For the first time, these audits established transparency as to the impact on citizens and business of their interactions across government.
Now twenty-five years later, given the magnitude of the impact of algorithms on citizens and democracy more broadly, a similar audit of algorithms is urgently needed.
The Stanford University Report “Government by Algorithm” cautioned that “little attention has been devoted to how agencies acquire such tools in the first place or oversee their use.” The Stanford report advocated that the US Federal administration undertake a “a rigorous canvass of AI use at the 142 most significant federal departments, agencies, and sub-agencies”. That is, an audit of algorithms.
It beggars belief that two of the most significant capability strategies in government (the Digital Transformation Strategy and the APS Workforce Strategy 2025), are devoid of any reference to algorithms. An algorithm audit would fundamentally change both of these.
Without this, it is impossible to understand the additive impact of algorithms on citizens and businesses, or the depth of policy skills and ethics required of the public sector. Or the forms of public scrutiny that are even possible by civil society.
In fact, in 2017 ABC News reported that it wrote to 11 Australian government departments responsible for administering legislation with computerised decision-making, asking what decisions the computers are making.
“The short answer is: we don’t know.”
We don’t know – but we may very well be shocked.
Application for grants. Application for Trade Marks. Job applications.
The ABC also reported that “the most recent new powers for automated decision-making apply to the departments of Health and Veterans Affairs.
“The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is undertaking veteran centric reform to significantly improve services for veterans and their families by re-engineering DVA business processes.”
With this reform, there is concern that veterans may end up facing flawed processes similar to those implemented by Centrelink.
These concerns might be justified, given the disability sector-wide outrage over safety and human rights impacts of the proposed NDIS RoboPlans.
Stuart Robert, who retains significant influence over service delivery and digital transformation, described “the kind of transformation the government wants is its approach not just to the NDIS but also Veterans Affairs and Aged Care.”
All this would involve algorithms. Access determined by facial biometric algorithms; plans generated by algorithms; funding determined by algorithms; debt determined by algorithms; and the potential control of payments by blockchain algorithms.
The situation at present, is that there is no transparency, knowledge of or governance around the use and sharing of algorithms by government agencies in Australia.
Compounding this and of grave concern is the new intergovernmental agreement on data-sharing, which expands the sharing of data between public and private sector organisations.
The additive impact of bias on citizens from the use and sharing of algorithms across agencies, across jurisdictions and across sectors will be unfathomable. Pre-emptive legal challenges will take place, as happened in the UK.
So there should be a detente on the use and planning of algorithms until an audit of algorithms is done.
Fairness can only come from transparency, a duty of care and the active governance of ethics.
Stuart Robert will still have significant influence over government service delivery and digital transformation despite a new ministerial position, with ongoing roles in two major Cabinet committees.
Mr Robert was announced as the new Minister for Employment, Workforce, Skills, Small and Family Business last month after serving as government services minister since mid-2019. He had been previously rumoured to be taking over as Home Affairs minister as part of this reshuffle.
With the dual role as chair of the service delivery committee and a new member of the expenditure review committee, Mr Robert will play a prominent role in overseeing the government’s digital transformation and service delivery, and on the spending behind it.
He has been appointed to the influential Cabinet expenditure review committee, which deals with government spending around the budget and MYEFO, and is chaired by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, with whom Mr Robert has a close relationship.
Mr Robert will also remain as chair of the Service Delivery and Coordination Committee, despite no longer being the relevant minister.
Stuart Robert’s influence on government service delivery will remain
The chairs of this committee are not always appointed based on their ministerial portfolio, and Mr Robert will be remaining in the role after being appointed following another reshuffle last year, where he took over from now Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment Dan Tehan.
The Service Delivery and Coordination Committee looks at the implementation of the government’s key priorities in the area, including connected service delivery and communications.
While Linda Reynolds, who is on extended health leave from Parliament, is now the responsible minister, Mr Robert will still be closely involved with the government’s digital transformation efforts, including the significant myGov rebuild, the digital identity scheme and the upcoming refresh of the digital transformation strategy.
Mr Robert announced late last year that the Digital Transformation Agency would be updating the strategy, which was first unveiled in late 2018. The strategy’s primary aim is to make all government services available digitally by 2025.
The new strategy will take into account the changed nature of service delivery due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and the increased demand for these services.
The DTA released a discussion paper on the new strategy late last year, with feedback due by the end of 2020.
Mr Robert also oversaw the launch of the new Services Australia department in late 2019, replacing the former Department of Human Services.
The government services portfolio includes significant tech projects including digital identity, the myGov rebuild, the internal cloud uplift scheme, the COVIDSafe app and the new data-sharing scheme which is currently the subject of a senate inquiry.
It also includes oversight of the government’s IT procurement through the DTA, which has seen a sharp uptick in spending on contractors and consultants in recent years.
NDIS participants, including some with intellectual disabilities, were “lured” into participating in trials of the controversial new independent assessments with “scam-like” text messages, former NDIS Technology Authority chief Marie Johnson says.
The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) is currently conducting a second pilot of the independent assessments scheme, a fundamental overhaul of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) involving the use of independent assessors to decide what participant’s needs are and how much funding they will receive, replacing the use of existing doctors and medical reports.
The first pilot saw 600 of these assessments completed, with participants having a primary disability of Autism Spectrum Disorder, an intellectual disability or a psychosocial disability. The second pilot is ongoing, with the NDIA aiming to complete 4000 assessments.
Marie Johnson: NDIS participants have been “lured” into pilots
The NDIA is inviting existing participants to take part in the pilot through text messages, cold calls and emails, with offers of $150 in exchange for participation. The text messages have included the phrase “exclusive invitation”, and have been sent directly to NDIS participants.
Ms Johnson, who is now the chief executive of the Centre for Digital Business, said the NDIA is effectively “luring” participants into being involved in the pilots by using tactics typically used by scammers or in retail promotions.
“It was these quite chaotic communications to participants and their families. People would get multiple text messages and this is clearly classic scamming strategies, and think about the people that are receiving these,” Ms Johnson told InnovationAus.
Ms Johnson raised concerns with the issue in a recent submission to a Joint Standing Committee inquiry into the independent assessments.
“It is utterly unethical and verging on maladministration that this type of communication is used at all, let alone in communications targeted at people with disability, and which would include vulnerable people with psychosocial disability,” Ms Johnson said in the submission.
“This is a direct consequence of the lack of an ethics framework and lack of ethics oversight more broadly. The scam-like approaches used by the NDIA in these text messages to participants…is not only counter to the efforts of the Office of the eSafety Commissioner, but exposes participants to harm more broadly by creating confusion as to what is or is not a scam.”
In response, an NDIA spokesperson said the agency “rejected the premise” that participants were “lured” into the pilots, saying they are voluntary and those taking part can withdraw at any part.
Ms Johnson’s daughter accesses the NDIS, and she said she has received text messages about the pilots, along with follow-up cold calls.
“I’ve received texts on behalf of my daughter, but you never respond to them because you just don’t know if it’s a scam. But many of these people may have an intellectual or cognitive disability. For the agency to say ‘we’re sending this to everybody’ is utterly unethical because you don’t know the state of mind or ability of the person,” Ms Johnson told InnovationAus.
“People are getting bombarded with these things. The agency is trying to get as many people signed up to do these pilots as possible – it was really a mass marketing type of communications campaign. People say they’re utterly overwhelmed by it.”
People with Disabilities Australia president Samantha Connor, who also runs the NDIS Grassroots Facebook group which has 55,000 members, said she has heard from multiple people who felt there were being “bullied” into taking part in the trial, and offered “bribes”.
“The way that the text messages are constructed is a problem. Until recently people weren’t aware of the issue at all, they weren’t aware that they were conducting the trial that might significantly impact their funding, they just said ‘look you’ll get $150 to be a part of this new pilot’,” Ms Connor told InnovationAus.
Participants were contacted via letters, emails, phone calls and SMS, an NDIA spokesperson said.
“Participation in the independent assessment pilot has been by invitation, at which time people have the option to voluntarily opt in or decline to participate,” the spokesperson told InnovationAus.
Ms Johnson said she also received cold calls from private numbers about the independent assessment pilot, with the caller asking for information about the NDIS.
“That’s like asking for my bank account number. I’m able to respond back to them that way but a great many people aren’t. This might be the NDIS but it then creates a problem for people if they are subject to a scam and they respond,” she said.
There are also concerns around the NDIA’s data handling practice around this trial. When someone clicks the link in the text message sent by the agency about this, the form states that the server storing information on the trial is hosted in Chicago.
“From a data sovereignty perspective that’s pretty bad – I don’t think that is in line with privacy data governance,” Ms Johnson said.
“It raises questions about the independent assessments, how they’re conducted and where the data is gathered.”
An NDIA spokesperson said the data is “stored in line with the NDIS privacy policy”.
Autism Awareness Australia CEO Nicole Rogerson initially agreed to take part in an independent assessment trial for her son, who has autism, earlier this year. After voluntarily agreeing to take part in the pilot, Ms Rogerson eventually opted to withdraw from it.
“Once this thing rolls out, there’s no right of appeal, people have to deal with a stranger coming into their home,” Ms Rogerson told InnovationAus.
“The government has just decided to completely disregard any clinical input from Australia’s leading disability experts – they would rather automate it. This is the same minister who gave us robodebt.”
The NDIA is not listening to the widespread criticism of the trial and new assessments scheme, Ms Rogerson said.
“This is the first time I feel really pointless in this process. I’ve never felt like our opinions, feedback and knowledge has been more dismissed,” she said.
“The government just doesn’t see people with a disability as humans who need to be carefully managed and supported. They see them as a budget blackhole that needs to be stopped. It can be better than that.
“The real reality is it’s going to affect peoples’ lives and mental health. The government can forge ahead with it but we’re going to remind them every step of the way they’re going to make a terrible decision with a real impact on Australians’ lives.”
Industry and professional groups are confident the local technology sector will not be lost in Monday’s cabinet reshuffle, which saw Karen Andrews elevated from the Industry portfolio to Home Affairs and embattled coalition ministers moved to technology portfolios.
The Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA) is confident government departments responsible for technology and digital services can withstand the turnover at the top because of established agendas, personnel and budgets.
“From our point of view, what we’re seeing is a continued prioritisation of technology,” AIIA chief executive Ron Gauci told InnovationAus.
Ron Gauci: We’re seeing is a continued prioritisation of technology
“We’re seeing that our industry still operates within quite a number of ministerial portfolios, including ongoing support with Stuart Robert with workforce and skills and small business.
“I just see that all this [reshuffle] does is add to the depth of exposure we have across the industries.”
Attorney-General Christian Porter will become the new Minister for Industry, Science and Technology, the fifth person to hold the position in the five years and the seventh since the Coalition won government in 2013.
Linda Reynolds has been moved from the Defence portfolio to take over as Minister for Government Services, replacing Stuart Robert who moves to the Employment, Workforce and Skills portfolio.
Mr Gauci said the AIIA looks forward to speaking with new Industry Minister Christian Porter and new Government Services Minister Lynda Reynolds. He also welcomed the retention of the Digital Economy portfolio by Senator Jane Hume.
The Australian Computer Society has also welcomed the new leadership.
“With technology critical to Australia’s economic growth as the nation recovers from the effects of COVID-19, we look forward to working with Minister Porter and his team in developing government policies to boost the ICT sector,” said ACS chief executive Rupert Grayston in a statement.
Mr Grayston also thanked outgoing Minister Karen Andrews for her support and efforts over the past two and a half years.
The AIIA expects responsibility for the DTA to remain in the Social Services portfolio with its new minister Ms Reynolds. Again, Mr Gauci is confident in the agency’s “well and truly entrenched” budget, processes, agenda will provide stability amid new leadership.
“We don’t see that that change in minister will change what the DTA does and how it does it,” he said.
“Given that the budgets and the strategic plan are well and truly in place and in motion we look forward to continuing working with the DTA in the execution of that.”
The AIIA has been collaborating with the DTA officially since 2018 and signed a new three-year memorandum of understanding in March this year to “achieve better outcomes for people and businesses using government digital services” including improving skills in the ICT industry.
The imminent rollout of a digital COVID-19 vaccination certification risks becoming another government tech wreck, Labor and a number of digital rights advocates have warned, with concerns over the lack of consultation and privacy considerations.
The federal government revealed over the weekend that Australians would be able to access a proof of vaccination certification following a COVID-19 vaccine through the Express Plus Medicare app or the myGov app.
This will be completed through the existing Australian Immunisation Register (AIM), which includes history statements and proof of vaccinations.
Under microscope: Is the vaccine certificate the next public sector tech wreck?
Government Services Minister Stuart Robert said Australians would be able to show this certificate on a smartphone as proof they had received the COVID-19 vaccine.
Under legislation passed last week, it will be mandatory for people to record information on the register after receiving a vaccination. But getting the vaccination itself remains voluntary.
Services Australia has been working on preparing myGov and the Medicare apps for the important new functions for more than three months, and the department has also made “critical enhancements to the Australian Immunisation Register”, Services Australia general manager Hank Jongen said.
“In preparation for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, Services Australia has made critical enhancements to the Australian Immunisation Register including increasing system capacity so more customers can access their information on the register at the same time, new AIR functionality to capture more detailed information about vaccines given and updating immunisation history statements to show all COVID-19 vaccine doses,” Mr Jongen said.
“Australians can be assured the government takes the integrity of the Medicare system and the Australian Immunisation Register extremely seriously and has contemporary cybersecurity in place to protect people’s personal information.”
Digital rights advocates have expressed concern over the privacy of the highly sensitive health information that will be stored on a database, pointing to the government’s recent history of tech projects.
Electronic Frontiers Australia board member Justin Warren said more information is needed about the planned vaccination certificates, and the privacy safeguards being put in place.
“It feels rather rushed and there isn’t a lot of detail about what the actual end goals are here. What problem is being solved exactly? And why is this the right way to do it? It feels a lot like a repeat of COVIDSafe,” Mr Warren told InnovationAus.
“EFA is disappointed that the government tends to default to announcements about magic technology and dismisses legitimate concerns with vague platitudes about how secure and excellent it’ll be. Australians deserve better,” he said.
“We need to understand how this will work in practice, what the risks and benefits really are, and how this will affect those already being left behind: those without ready access to the technology needed to participate in modern life.
“The people who brought us robodebt and lengthy Centrelink queues need to spend a bit more time designing for abuse cases and not just use cases.”
Deakin University senior lecturer Dr Monique Mann said the government should conduct a privacy impact assessment on the vaccination certificates and consult widely with experts on the matter.
“There is a need to have some appropriate, robust discussion and to have some safeguards in place. Creating situations in which people are required to disclose information to access certain things means you’re going to need some safeguards, such as ensuring it’s proportionate,” Dr Mann told InnovationAus.
“We’ve seen all of these initiatives like COVIDSafe and the census, and this is not something that needs to be rushed, especially when sensitive health information is being stored and shared,” she said.
“We have to be incredibly careful when dealing with sensitive health information. In states of emergency, I would generally caution against new technologies or new apps being a silver bullet to the pandemic response.”
Speaking on ABC Radio National shadow social services minister Linda Burney said she supported the concept of a COVID-19 vaccine digital passport, but also raised concerns around privacy and the government’s tech capacity.
“I know there are issues around privacy that need to be considered…[and] when there is a proposal or legislation in front of Parliament, we’ll be looking at it very carefully. The government’s record on terms of digital applications is not a good reputation, in the sense of robodebt, in the sense of information about Medicare cards being available on the black web,” Ms Burney said.
“There are issues around the capacity of the government to be able to do this properly. And there are issues around privacy and issues around whether state governments and first ministers think it’s a good idea. But it’s important that there be the capacity for this to take place.
“I’m not confident in anything Stuart Robert says. The digital passport has to be secure, and the issue of personal information is probably the first priority that you want to be looking at.”
