“With the Digital ID Bill passing through the Senate, the bombardment of promotional material has begun – even ahead of the Lower House rubber stamping the Bill in May.
Government services have moved to drown-out serious safety, privacy and liberty concerns … “
As much as the Government attempts to downplay the importance of introducing a single central digital identifier for all Australians, the truth is that this legislation is the most significant I’ve encountered during my time in the Senate.
t’s the glue that holds together the digital control agenda by which every Australian will be controlled, corralled, exploited and then gagged when they speak or act in opposition.
The government knows Digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a Digital ID.
The Digital ID will, in effect, create a live data file of your movements, purchases, accounts and associates containing reference to every piece of data being held in the private and government sector as a first step in a wider agenda. Tech giants have been building huge data files on every Australian for years.
Those huge data files that contain every website you visited, every post you made on their social media, everything you have ever bought online. Keywords scanned from conversations overheard by Siri and Alexa in your home are now unmasked.
Until now, that data was anonymised using a unique identifier rather than name and address, which has always been there as well. However, tech companies were not allowed to use it or share data with others that included the person’s name and address. Until Now.
Look for the tech giants to ask for your Digital ID as a requirement of using their service. The point of that exercise is to ensure they put the right name on the right data treasure trove.
This is why the Liberal Party have moved amendments to the Digital ID Bill to bring private corporations into this roll out earlier. All those treasure troves of data worth billions, trillions, that have been accumulated for years illegally, by retailers, tech and data companies – all that unrealised profit just sitting there has been too much of a temptation for the Liberal Nationals to resist and is now joined with Labor in pushing Digital ID.
There will be no escape from the digital ID.
Australians now have a digital version of “papers please” and Australians will never be the same.
Life is about to change for every Australian. As much as Senator Gallagher seeks to downplay the significance of introducing one central digital identifier for each and every Australian, the reality is that this is the most significant legislation I’ve seen in my time in the Senate. It’s the glue that holds together the digital control agenda by which every Australian will be controlled, corralled, exploited and then gagged when they speak or act in opposition.
The Digital ID Bill will be misused because this bill is written to be misused. The government knows that digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a digital ID. The digital ID will, in effect, create a live data file of your movements, purchases, accounts and associates, containing reference to every piece of data being held in the private and government sector as the first step in a wider agenda. Google, Facebook and other tech giants have been building huge data files on every Australian for years. Those huge data files contain every website you’ve visited, every post you made on their social media and everything you have ever bought online, and the keyword scan from conversations overheard by Siri and Alexa in your home are now unmasked.
Until now, that data was anonymised using a unique identifier, rather than name and address, which has always been there as well. However, tech companies were not allowed to use it or to share data with others that included a person’s name and address—until now. Look for the tech giants to ask for your digital ID as a requirement of using their service. The point of that exercise is to ensure they put the right name on the right data treasure trove. It’s not just the tech giants heading into the data gold rush. Those reward cards you scan at the checkout have included terms and conditions to allow Coles and Woolies to make a record of every purchase you have made for years. This is why the Liberal Party has moved amendments to the Digital ID Bill to bring private corporations into this rollout earlier. All those treasure troves of data worth billions or trillions have accumulated for years illegally, and all that unrealised profit just sitting there has been too much of a temptation for the Liberals and Nationals to resist, and they have now joined with Labor in pushing digital ID.
Those listening at home may be wondering how an individual could avoid being drawn into this net of data trading and surveillance. The simple answer is: you can’t. This Labor government has already passed the Identity Verification Services Bill, which makes it legal for every Australian’s photo or video likeness to be used to verify that person against the database containing their biometric data. Biometric data simply means a digital representation of your face that allows for instantaneous electronic matching. Just days after that bill passed, the first thing the government did was to send an email to people with a myGov ID to update their myGov record by providing a facial scan on their phone. Yes, that really happened. This is what these people are doing to you. This is not voluntary.
Ten million Australians have a myGov ID. Most of those were forced into it to access Centrelink benefits. It’s cruel. There are another two million Australians who were forced to get a myGov ID to register as a company director, despite the director identity enabling legislation not even mentioning myGov. The government did it anyway! The database the government is using for data surveillance is the national driver’s licence database which has 17 million records—everyone who has, or has had, a driver’s licence. This government doesn’t need an excuse to further digital control for everyday Australians. Socialists love control. Socialism needs control. For socialism to exist, there must be control. The government knows control will be used by government to identify people who say mean things on social media to speed up enforcement of our new laws against saying home truths to crazy or dishonest people. No hiding behind anonymous accounts or false addresses; you can expect a knock on your door at home, work or school, as we’re seeing happening in other countries with digital identity already in place. Only by being able to keep tabs on citizens 24/7 can the government possibly hope to introduce the wealth heist they have planned.
Anyone viewing this topic for the first time can see the detail of what I’m talking about on my website. The committee report on the digital ID bill was a travesty. The committee made a recommendation to pass the bill which was simply not supported by the evidence they received during the inquiry. Witness after witness testified that this rancid evil bill failed to protect privacy, failed to establish that the ID would be voluntary, failed on human rights grounds and failed on technical grounds. One blackout, and the whole thing comes crashing down. Yet all these valid criticisms from leading organisations who, unlike the government, know what they’re talking about were simply ignored.
The UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation (‘UNSW Allens Hub’) is an independent community of scholars based at UNSW Sydney.
During the inquiry into the government’s Digital Identity Bill, I asked representatives from the UNSW Allens Hub about their submission, which included data from India where digital identity was originally supposed to be voluntary but has become mandatory, and has resulted in restrictions on citizens despite government guarantees at the outset.
Their position is that legislative frameworks and protections should exist to prevent overreach from both government and non governmental authorities. Safeguards should be put in place to protect citizens who are being provided with essential services via digital identity to combat the power creep that we saw with the Director’s ID.
What is becoming clear, and the cautionary tale from India bears this out, both governments and private companies are embracing, with equal enthusiasm, the application of digital identity for all as the most convenient system for their purposes. Yet, what does this mean for Australians’ privacy and data given the cyber-security failures we have already seen from government and the private sector?
At the Digital Identity inquiry I spoke with representatives of the Human Technology Institute, an industry body that promotes human rights in the development, use, regulation and oversight of new technology. Their comments make it clear that there needs to be strengthened legislation to improve privacy and other human rights protections with regards to the government’s Digital ID.
The government’s Digital ID Bill is part of the triad of tyranny, which is currently being whisked with indecent speed through what should have been a more careful scrutinising and debating process.
Surely privacy and human rights were not going to be left out of the new “trusted” digital identity that the Albanese government is keen for us all to embrace?
At the Digital Identity Inquiry in Canberra, I questioned the Australian Banking Association about how Australians who don’t want a digital ID would lead a normal life without one.
I also asked how internet outages would impact on people’s lives when they rely on a digital identity to access their money.
Three Bills are being rammed through the Senate to create legislation that will transform the UN-WEF plans for surveillance and control into a dystopian reality in Australia.
The first is the Identity Verification Services Bill 2023, which is designed to permit the use of biometric data to locate and track citizens and normalise it. The second, the Digital Identity Bill 2023, will ensure Australians have no choice but to succumb to setting up a digital ID. The third is the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2023. This is the censorship tool to make sure both the media and social media carries government sanctioned opinions only. The government in power is exempted and free to be the Ministry of Truth, spreading misinformation or disinformation. Remember how well that went during the COVID response?
The Driver’s Licence database is being upgraded to become the repository of your master identification record, which is already being used to establish your identity with a paper check and now with a facial scan.
I implored the Senate to vote against and to reject this Bill. This is the first of three Bills necessary to turn Australia into the world’s first World Economic Forum digital prison.
One Nation strongly opposes the Identity Verification Services Bill 2023. Here’s why. The Albanese government’s great mate, Blackrock boss Larry Fink, and predatory billionaires at the World Economic Forum are fond of the phrase ‘you will own nothing and be happy’. What they really mean is that they will own everything and you will comply. Why would people voluntarily enslave themselves, give up their homes, cars and household goods and lose the right to travel freely, I hear you ask. The answer is that people will not be given a choice. They will be coerced—forced into it. That’s the purpose of this government’s triad of tyranny.
First is the Identity Verification Services Bill 2023, which will normalise and allow the use of biometric data to locate and track citizens. Second is the Digital ID Bill 2023, which will force every Australian into having a digital ID. Third is the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2023, which will ensure media and social media only carry government sanctioned opinions; the government will be exempted and can be free to spread misinformation and disinformation.
Biometric data is your face turned into a data file based on your physical characteristics. It allows for faster and more accurate identification. They will capture your face. The national drivers licence database is being upgraded to become the repository of your master identification record, which is already used to establish your identity with a paper check. Now it will have a facial scan.
Australians do not need to consent in a meaningful manner. The bill currently uses the word ‘consent’ without definition. Consent can be implied. Here’s an example. If a person sees a video of themselves on a self-service check-out at the supermarket and uses the check-out anyway, it’s considered implied consent. The government has accepted that implied consent is no consent at all and has upgraded the reference to ‘consent’ in their amendment on sheet UD100 to ‘explicit consent’. That isn’t good enough either. Explicit consent can be provided as blanket consent. An example would be MasterCard changing their terms and conditions to allow for facial recognition whenever their card is used. Once the card owner gets the email saying, ‘We have updated our terms and conditions. Click here to approve,’ and people click without reading it, one of those new terms could be permission for facial recognition. Did you give consent? No.
Banks currently record the image of anyone using their ATMs and then use that in the case of a fraudulent transaction. Banks will update their terms and conditions to give themselves the right to run your biometric
verification on each occasion before allowing access to your account. Refusing the new permission gives your bank or card company the right to refuse service. It’s that simple. It’s blackmail. This is why the government suggesting a digital ID or biometric data check will be voluntary is a complete lie. It’s compulsory, because not agreeing means you lose your bank account or payment card or service—just as those voluntary COVID injections were compulsory if you wanted to keep your job and your house and feed your family.
I foreshadow an amendment in the committee stage on sheet 2327 to change the definition of ‘explicit’ to ‘active’, meaning on each occasion your face is to be scanned they must ask permission before they scan it and make sure they get your permission each time. That’s active consent. This should be supported, because the government already says Australians will have to consent to their biometric data being used—unless, of course, that was misinformation.
This bill does not offer a direct link between the authentication action at a check-out, office, airport et cetera and the master file. A government hub receives a request and pulls the master file, meaning only the government has access to the master file. This seems to look acceptable, yet it means there’s a master file with 17 million records containing name, address, telephone, date of birth, drivers licence number, passport number and a biometric identification file all sitting in the same database. That’s all the information necessary to steal someone’s ID and impersonate them online—a hacker’s paradise.
Robodebt proved that our bureaucrats are incapable of even a simple one-to-one database match, and now they’re being trusted to pull this off. It’s impossible without a high level of compulsion and without completely ignoring victims of software or data-matching errors. If the look-up fails, then your purchase, travel, document, signing or whatever other use fails. If the purchase was for petrol, your family could be stranded late at night. We might as well start the royal commission now.
Downstream from the big government database are what I call intermediaries or entities with participating agreements. There are 20 of these so far. Their role is to take a request for authentication from a bank or card
processor, solicitor, real estate agent, airline—anyone needing you to prove you are who you say you are—and submit that to the national drivers licence database hub to run past the master database. In the original bill there were no effective checks and balances on those businesses. The government’s amendment of its own bill has added a few checks and balances to ensure that intermediaries must delete data received as part of the verification process.
Thank you, Minister Gallagher. That, taken together with my amendment to make the level of consent clear, takes some of the potential abuse out of the bill. A clear privacy statement would have helped. The government have promised they will do that later. There are trust issues around that promise.
Questions remain around the New South Wales government’s comment that this bill will allow them to verify that every person detected driving a car past a surveillance camera has a drivers licence.
The only way this can be achieved is if every driver is scanned every time they pass a detection camera and their image is compared to the national database. Does this mean those cameras going up around Australia are just the right height to scan the driver’s face and that the cameras will be used to scan and verify your identity each time you pass one? Yes, it does. Before they work out who you are and whether you have a licence, they have to scan and verify your biometrics. It’s the only explanation for the New South Wales government’s comment.
For those listening to this with incredulity, I remind you that this is exactly the system now in place in London, with Lord Mayor Khan’s ULEZ, Ultra Low Emission Zone, and in Birmingham, Manchester and other cities in Britain. It’s really the World Economic Forum’s 15-minute cities happening right now. Residents are locked into their zone and can only leave a certain number of times a year. This is happening in Britain. That depends on the make and model of the car you drive. If you drive a car they don’t like, you can’t move. Rich people who can afford electric cars can, of course, come and go as they please. Everyday citizens are locked in or, when they leave, the cameras detect them leaving and fine them on the spot. It’s a fine of 180 pounds a week for leaving over seven days.
That’s in Britain now. Already it has raised hundreds of millions of pounds because people will pay for freedom.
Look it up. Don’t just trust me: look it up. There are fines for not registering with the system and fines for breaching the 15-minute limits. It’s a virtual fence. It’s like an electric dog collar. It’s the foundation for a social credit system to completely control people’s lives. So don’t tell me this is a conspiracy theory. It’s real and it’s happening now in our mother country.
Cash is necessary to ensure these measures are ameliorated as much as possible, which is why the globalist wing of the Liberal Party tried to ban cash in the last parliament, which One Nation defeated. It should be obvious that predatory, parasitic billionaires and some of their lackeys in the Labor and Liberal Party are getting their ducks in a row because they want to be ready for the full implementation of their globalist masters’ control agenda, exactly as they promised. It’s not like they’re hiding any of this. When they tell us what they’re going to do, listen.
Remember this government’s triad of tyranny. Already entered into parliament is the Identity Verification Services Bill 2023 to normalise and allow the use of biometric data to locate and track citizens. Here it is. There’s the Digital ID Bill 2023 to force every Australian into having a digital ID. There’s the misinformation and disinformation bill 2023, which will ensure media and social media only carry government sanctioned opinions, and the government is exempted. I implore the Senate to vote against this bill and to reject this bill. This is the first of three bills necessary to turn Australia into the world’s first World Economic Forum digital prison.
Topics discussed:
* Introduction of the Digital ID Bill into the Senate
* The Pandemic Treaty and IHR Amendments
* And more …
How can Minister Gallagher claim Digital ID will be secure given government is one of the largest perpetrators of data breaches?
I questioned whether it “wouldn’t be compulsory” in the same way the government claims vaccines were never compulsory.
What Minister Gallagher failed to mention is that Section 74(4) of the Digital ID Bill allows the Digital ID to be made compulsory if a bureaucrat is “satisfied it is appropriate to do so”.
This will almost definitely be abused and makes a joke of the claim Digital ID would be voluntary.
Senator ROBERTS: My question is for the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher. ABC reports in July revealed that hackers were able to exploit loopholes in the government’s myGov system and, as of February 2023, lodged more than half a billion dollars in fraudulent tax claims. Given the minister’s claims that a digital identity would be secure, can the minister please provide an updated figure on how many billions of dollars in fraudulent claims hackers have lodged to date in exploiting myGov system vulnerabilities?
Senator Gallagher: The first thing I would say about that is myGov is different to myGovID; they are completely different things. I don’t have updated information. MyGov is the site you go to, as many people in this place will have, to engage with government in an online way. But myGovID is a digital ID that you control and own and use for verifying your identity and, if you are a business, for engaging with the tax office in particular. There are 10.5 million Australians who have a myGovID and use it for that purpose, but it is very different to the question that Senator Roberts raises around the myGov system, which I don’t have an update on. It falls under the Minister for Government Services’ portfolio. I am happy to see if there is something that minister would be able to provide you around an update on that.
MyGov obviously is a system that we invest heavily in to make sure it is useable and safe for people when they are engaging with government, but that doesn’t change the comments I made last week about the digital ID system being safe and trustworthy and voluntary. If you are an individual, you will not have to have one of these digital IDs but, if you do want one, the option is there, and it’s a way of reducing the amount of information that government collects in order to verify your identity. So, the two things, myGovID and myGov—I accept they are similarly named—are very different things indeed.
The President: Senator Roberts, a first supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, in June, Russian hackers compromised top secret Australian Defence Force data. In July, NDIS participants were exposed in a data breach, and the Department of Home Affairs leaked personal small business information. In August, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs leaked medical data. In September, Australian Federal Police data was hacked. Why is it falsely claimed the government’s digital ID is secure when the government can’t keep data secure?
Senator Gallagher: I don’t accept the proposition that’s being put by Senator Roberts. Yes, government systems are under constant attack and threat, as most businesses are in this country, from cybercrime, from hackers, and from scams and criminals that are engaged in such activity, so the government invests heavily in protecting our systems, making sure they are safe. But in a sense, you are making the argument for a digital ID, because a digital ID is about reducing the amount of information that the government holds on you about you for services. Because of the way the system works, you retain the information, but you’re able to have your ID verified through a process of exchange that allows those systems to be unlocked. Absolutely fundamental to the digital ID system is reducing the amount of information, having the safeguards in place— (Time expired)
The President: Senator Roberts, a second supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, will the government support a One Nation amendment to the digital identity bill explicitly stating that no Australian will ever be denied access to services because they do not have a digital ID? Or is the claim that the digital ID won’t be compulsory just misinformation?
Senator Gallagher: I’m happy to engage with you genuinely on digital ID. I accept your interest in it and I am very willing to work with anyone in this chamber to make sure that the legislation that passes this place is the best that it can be. In relation to your specific question, as part of the bill we do require that services be maintained and offered for people that don’t want to have a digital ID. That protection is there. I am very happy to engage with you more broadly on the bill, including in other areas that you might have concerns about.
That clause relates specifically to individuals. As you know, myGov ID is required for business-related services, and part of that is about minimising fraud and identity theft, verifying individuals as part of their engagement with the tax office.
Labor has pushed ahead in lockstep with other countries to implement the World Economic Forum’s globalist control measures. I take note of the government’s answer on Digital Identity Bill which it has introduced. The idea that the government can keep our data safe is a farce.
This legislation seeks to bring about one Digital ID that does more than the MyGov digital ID or any of the others floating around. It puts all your identity eggs into one digital basket. For hackers this is truly the pot of cyber gold at the end of the woke rainbow.
Despite the minister’s protestations that this digital ID won’t be mandatory and “it’s only for your safety and convenience”, we all remember how “no jab no job” was considered free choice by the government. But this bill goes further and contains a clear provision for the government to make this digital ID mandatory if they so wish.
For Senator Gallagher to say that even the current version of MyGov digital ID is not compulsory is blatant misinformation. Centrelink won’t talk to you without it, and the legislated Directors’ ID required a MyGov digital ID for anyone who wanted to keep being a director. You can see where this is all going.
We are being corralled into a digital prison, one bill at a time. For our ‘convenience’. One Nation will oppose the government’s Digital ID.
I move:
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to questions without notice I asked today relating to digital identity.
If people want a taste of the dictatorship digital ID will be used to introduce, look no further than Minister Katy Gallagher’s social media posts. On Friday she took to X to announce that she was proud of introducing the digital ID bill, declaring it secure, convenient and not compulsory. Senator Gallagher’s post racked up a million views, many of which were from Australians gobsmacked that the minister blocked all comments on her post. So much for this Labor government’s promised accountability and transparency. I guess the minister knew that, if she allowed comments, Australians would have easily debunked the misleading claims that a digital ID would be secure and not compulsory. Despite the censorship, Community Notes—the people’s fact check—were added to the post, debunking the minister’s claims. These Community Notes have mysteriously disappeared and reappeared over the weekend, making us ask whether the government applied any pressure on X to have them removed. We know that the departments of home affairs and health pressured social media to remove COVID related posts. We know that the Department of Defence asked social media to remove posts critical of the Chief of the Defence Force. It’s not a stretch to imagine that the government has done the exact same thing here.
The idea that the government can keep any data secure is a farce. As I illustrated in my questions, government departments are our country’s most frequent perpetrators of data leaks. We know that digital ID will, effectively, be compulsory. The government says people won’t be forced to have it, unless of course people want to access government services, get a driver’s licence or enter some buildings. Just like the COVID jabs, digital ID won’t be compulsory, they tell us, yet the government will make people get one to participate in society—to live. One Nation will continue fighting the dystopian digital ID and government censorship on every front.
Question agreed to.
Labor is gagging the senate and forcing a vote on bills without debate.
These are bills relating to legislation of great significance, which will impact the lives of everyday Australians.
The Senate’s role is to ensure legislation has proper scrutiny. This is 1000s of pages of legislation, including the Identity Verification Services Bill which is a defacto digital identity. This is a shocking decision.
Each of these bills would normally require a day’s scrutiny, debate and potential amendments before passing. This Labor government, which promised Australians transparency and accountability, is strong-arming the bills through the senate.
What deals have been done to make this happen? And with whom?
Government wants to tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel. We must oppose this new dystopia at every turn.
Joel Jammal:
One of the biggest people exposing what Klaus Schwab has been doing is a man sitting in this room, Malcolm Roberts. Malcolm, could you please come to the stage? Now, Malcolm is a Senator for One Nation, A Senator for Queensland. Queensland is first.
Malcom Roberts:
Very important. I’m the senator for the people who are elected, sorry constituents. I’m not a senator for One Nation. I’m a senator for the people of Queensland in Australia with One Nation.
Joel Jammal:
Absolutely, absolutely. Australia First, Queenslanders first. You’ve been taking the fight in the Senate, no matter if you have the numbers for a bill or not. You’ve been raising awareness on issues. How do you deal with Canberra? We were there and we were at a press conference yesterday with Nigel. The place feels dead. How do you get things on? How do you raise awareness on these issues?
Malcom Roberts:
Well, number one, I’ve got a remarkable leader in Pauline Hanson, and I mean that sincerely because Pauline has been in there fighting for a long, long time, and nothing deters her. If she says something, she means it. So I can trust her. If I disagree with her and I talk to her about it, she’ll either say, give me your facts. In which case, I’ll give them to her and she’ll say, “Fine, we’ll change your mind.” Or she’ll say, “No, I don’t agree with you,” so that’s wonderful. You know exactly where you stand, and she likes it when I tell her exactly where I stand, so that’s the first thing.
But the second thing is that we do what we think is right. That’s fundamental because then it doesn’t matter what I do, I’m comfortable with it. I don’t care who criticise me, how much they criticise me. If I’m doing the right thing, then I’m very, very comfortable. So I don’t care what people think.
Joel Jammal:
God bless you. I think the other parties need that as well. Is anyone in this room getting a little bit twitchy about digital currencies and digital passports? And I’m seeing a lot of nodding heads. Any business owners here? Put your hand up. I think the states have a lot of plans for businesses. Malcolm, what’s going on, on this front and how can people protect themselves? What’s coming down the line?
Malcom Roberts:
Well, to understand what’s coming down the line, we have to look at what has been coming along the line behind us. What did we see in COVID? We saw so many things for the first time. Any one of them we would’ve rejected, but instead they came steamrollered, one after the other and that just bamboozled people. Digital passes where you could and couldn’t go. Restrictions as to what you could do, what doctors can say.
I mean, a doctor, when you go to a doctor, you get his or her opinion about your health. You couldn’t get that now because the doctors are told what to say, so that’s the kind of thing we’re seeing coming. So a lot of the things that were done here, New Zealand, Canada, France, United States, we’re testing the way for digital identity.
You saw the Optus leak. Who’s have been involved in that? Anyone? 10 million people. Member of my staff left Optus in 2008, 14 years ago. He’s part of that leak. His information was leaked. So the big leaks come mainly from mistakes in big tech and in government, and they want us to trust them with our data, like hell. So what they’re trying to do is to get the Digital Identity Bill was introduced, not into Parliament, but it was circulated in the Parliament for discussion. Labour Party said they would support it.
Digital Identity Bill is about taking your data, health data, travel data, social media data, purchases, finances, everything about you and centralising it and then selling it. And if it goes to a foreign multinational, they look after it under their laws, not our laws, so it’s not secure. And then if you want to know your health data, you pay to get it. And then what they do is they bring in a digital currency to wipe out cash. And when you’ve got no cash, you’ve got no alternative and no choice. You understand that, and then they’ve got you. They’ve well and truly controlled.
And then they get onto a social credit system and they’re already doing it to us because they’re saying, if you produce more carbon dioxide, we’ll have to limit what you’re doing and carbon dioxide’s plant food. It’s a fertiliser. It’s wonderful. Without it, it’s a trace gas that’s essential for all life on this planet. It’s odourless, colourless, tasteless. It’s not a pollutant, but they fabricated this. So what you’re going to get more of, what we are going to get more of is lies to justify what they’re doing.
If you go to the World Economic Forum, they’re talking about my carbon. My carbon, your individual carbon, your individual carbon, your individual carbon dioxide. What they’re trying to say is they will put monitors on you and actually not a monitor. It’s going to be an app on this, which will estimate your carbon dioxide. It’s just a control mechanism, so that’s what they will do. They will justify everything that they want to cut in our lives through an app.
They will have passes what you can and can’t do, digital currency. The Reserve Bank in this country has been working on digital currency until we expose that for quite some years. They’re also working with other central banks around the world on their digital currency because they’re coming up with a global digital currency. So people talked about Pauline Hanson talking about the unelected global governance from the UN that was first murdered around 1996. She built a cat. She was ridiculed for it, but she’s telling the truth, so that’s what they’ve got coming down the line.
Job controls imposed, but the biggest thing of all, the scariest thing of all is that in the past, dictators use guns. Get down on your knees, buddy. Now they don’t. They use invisible systems, they use name calling, they use labels, they use indoctrination in schools. We’ve got kids thinking that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. It’s complete crap. This has not been going on for a few years, just like the COVID debacle, which was completely mismanaged because the health was never their concern. Their aim in COVID was to control us. That’s why they made such a stuff up of it, but they got what they wanted.
So this has been underway since 1944 with the formation of the UN for that very purpose. Now, 10 years ago, I would’ve laughed at anyone saying that. I know that for a fact. The UN senior people have been telling us that for a number of years. Ottmar Edenhofer, Murray Strong. Murray Strong concocted global warming, changed that into climate change. He did it, and then guess who formed the Chicago Climate Exchange for carbon dioxide credit trading? Yes. And who was doing the the directorships? Murray Strong. Murray Strong was a crook, a crook, and he had two aims in life. He stated them, unelected socialist global governance and deindustrialization of Western civilization.
What’s happening in Britain? Deindustrialization. What’s happening in America? Deindustrialization. What’s happening in Europe? Deindustrialization. What’s happening in Australia? Deindustrialization. We’re back heading back to the caves, but there’s one thing that’s really important and that is the people. If we wake up, that’s how we can stop them.
Pauline Hanson wanted a royal commission into financial services in this country. Turnbull was the Prime Minister. Morrison was the Treasurer. Morrison said 26 times, you’re not getting one. Turnbull said 16 times, you’re not getting one. So Pauline did a deal and got an inquiry that was called a Senate select inquiry into lending to primary production customers. She got that out of Turnbull. She made me the chair of that.
We went out into the bush, Pauline’s team and my team, and we helped the farmers put together submissions. We then held inquiries in the bush and we loaded up all the information and then we held the banks accountable in Sydney and in Canberra. We embarrassed them so much. Here she is. So we embarrassed them so much by getting the facts and the data out, that some of the nationals went to Turnbull and said, “You better have a royal commission because otherwise that’s going to be very embarrassing for you when our report comes out.” And there was a royal commission just before Pauline released the report.
Another thing, the Cash Ban Bill. James Ashby told me about the Cash Ban Bill. He’s on top of the things very, very well. Our staff got hold of it, we looked at it and sure enough it was a ban of cash for any purchase over $2,000, and you can see where that’s going. It would’ve been $200 and then complete ban. So what we did was we got hold of the cross bench, just my team plus Pauline’s staff. We got hold of the cross bench and showed them what was going on. They were horrified.
Then we got hold of some liberal branch members and they were horrified. The Labour Party and The Liberal Party and The National Party passed that through the lower House, came to the Senate, was sent to a committee, and because of the shit that we kicked up, it stayed in committee. And then I moved a motion to get rid of it off the Senate books and it got rid off Senate books, but they’re trying repeatedly in many other ways to ban cash because they want to control. Their main objective is control.
Joel Jammal:
You got to hand it to them. They’re diligent, aren’t they, Malcolm? They just won’t die. We are, absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. Pauline’s been to jail, and in second I will invite you to. Yes, she’s still here. Who says you can’t have a comeback, Pauline?
Now Malcolm, in a second I’m going to invite Pauline up, Senator Hanson rather. I’m very informal. I’m so comfortable with these senators. Tell me another senator in the major parties you can just approach like this. I mean, Malcolm has been fighting the fight. Pauline, Senator Hansen has been fighting the fight. Senator, what’s that? Oh, you love Pauline. Oh, cool. She invited me too. It’s polite too now. Okay. All right.
One Nation has been an absolute bull work against the major parties in the last few years. I particularly liked that time you held up the entire government agenda this year when you and Senator Rennick and Senator Antic held up the entire government agenda so they couldn’t get a single thing passed in the last five or six months because they would not move on the job.
Senator Rennick and Senator Antic said, “Scott Morrison, I know we’re in the Liberal Party, but we will not move on this.” We have to deal with stories like Sienna Knolls, 19 year old equestrian girl, healthy. You got to be quite healthy to be an equestrian. Jab injured, two jabs, jab injured. He said, “If you don’t move on this, if you don’t offer some protections, we’re not passing any bills. So between One Nation and these two liberal senators, they absolutely held up the entire government agenda for five months. It was a lame duck session. And so thank you guys for that and thank you for being a light on all of these issues. Thank you.
Malcom Roberts:
Thank you for doing what you’re doing.
Joel Jammal:
No, it’s my pleasure.
Remember the plan to restrict you to eating less than one bite of red meat per day? That’s only possible if the Government can track your every move with the Digital Identity Bill.
The United Nations has a problem. How can they control the carbon footprint of the world’s citizens? Not the whole world of course, just the West, the United Nations Conference of Parties 26. Gave us an insight into the UN’s menu-plan, where Scott Morrison watched without criticising their demand to reduce the carbon footprint of our food supply, instead of counting calories,
Australians will soon have their culinary delights and choices dictated to us by an unelected socialist bureaucracy, very soon government will tell our farmers what they can grow and punish Australian consumers if they buy the wrong things. This has already started with frightening reform schedule for Australian agriculture. The dream of micromanaging individual carbon emissions hinges on the soon to be passed, so-called Trusted Digital Identity Bill.
If Scott Morrison and Barnaby Joyce want to achieve their Net Zero 2050 dream, freedoms must be slashed, removed, it is only through the relentless digital stalking of citizens that the Liberal National’s government can micromanage purchasing choices. Businesses are punished with tax, while consumers get their credit score docked. This already happens in China, where a person’s shopping list lowers their social credit score until they cannot travel.
In Australia, it may be as simple as denying banking services because you dare to drive a four wheel drive to work. Australian banks have already shown a keen interest in the Trusted Digital Identity Bill saying it will quote, “allow them to create a rich view of their customers”. These are the same banks that already list climate risk as a means to deny loans. When the Liberals tell you that digital identity will make your life easier, remember there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The ‘Trusted Digital Identity Bill 2021’ is a piece of legislation designed to act as the framework for a permanent and expansive ‘digital identity’ for all Australian citizens.
‘Digital Identity’ acts as a master ID, joining together previously disconnected government databases containing confidential personal information.
Where the myGov app links things like a driver’s licence, passport, Medicare card, and vaccination record – the Digital Identity sets out to link ALL government data related to a person. Future iterations of the Digital Identity propose to pair this data against private sector information, such as purchasing records, to create a rich digital view of a citizen.
While Australia lacks the corresponding technological infrastructure to utilise a Digital Identity to its sinister potential (such as China’s spying street lights and billboards), this Bill – whether intentional or accidental – acts as the foundation for a China-style Social Credit System.
Governments do not create large citizen data collection points for no reason. This information is valuable, not only for research purposes, but for political strategies and future policies (such as ‘incentivising’ green initiatives). Once this information starts being collated by the government against a citizen, it will become like a browser history session that cannot be cleared. While the Bill does not specifically lay out applications for Digital Identity, accompanying documents and industry articles (from banking and insurance sectors) have already begun discussing its potential.
The Trusted Digital Identity Bill 2021 cannot be read or understood as a stand-alone policy. It forms part of an extensive policy framework under the government’s 2030 digital goals laid out in the Digital Economy Strategy 2030. According to this strategy (worth $1.2 billion in the 2021-2022 Budget), Australia’s Digital Identity is intended to connect into a global digital identity economy.
In other words, the problem is not so much with the technical setup/certifications of the Digital Identity as laid out in the Bill – the issue is with the intention of the Digital Identity and that catastrophic change to both privacy and the existing separation between the economy and the government.
What is also of concern is the heightened level of control that the government seeks to wield over the direction of the economy once it transforms into largely digital entity – as stated in its goals – and therefore its motivation for the establishment of a Trusted Digital Identity. The strategy stresses that Digital Identity is aimed at keeping us ‘safe’ and recovering from a ‘Covid economy’, but as we have learned, government is poorly equipped to carry out these tasks.
Australians have to ask themselves, do they really want the government acting as an omnipresent policeman standing guard over every commercial transaction?
Should the government be able to prevent a citizen from being ‘certified’ to purchase items from a private seller (something that is not possible with cash)?
Further, do Australians want to give the government power over the economy to micromanage its future by monitoring, punishing, and rewarding transactions in the same way they have started to interfere in the ‘green’ energy market?
Also of chief concern is the reason Digital Identity has been created in the first place. The government did not come up with the Trusted Digital Identity on their own to solve the issue of outdated government databases. As stated by the policymakers in their accompanying documentation, the Trusted Digital Identity is the brainchild of the World Economic Forum and their global digital identity roadmap.
The Trusted Digital Identity is required for the Digital Economy Strategy. The following is the intention of the government strategy:
‘The digital economy is key to securing our economic future and recovery from COVID-19. The Digital Economy Strategy targets investments that will underpin improvements in jobs, productivity and make Australia’s economy more resilient.’
Then, from the Digital Identity Consultation Regulation Impact Statement, the government quotes Shaping the Future of Digital Economy and New Value Creation directly from the World Economic Forum.
‘Further, research conducted by the WEF suggests that digital identity is essential for the growth of the digital economy more broadly encouraging digital, as well as physical engagement with public and private sector services, it has a pivotal role to play in rebooting the global economy in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Digital Identity uniquely positions businesses, the research concluded, to gain and maintain user trust and remain competitive, ‘…guarantee[ing] the realisation of greater economic potential…and advancing an economy that is more inclusive, equitable and stable for all’.’
And from the linked article:
‘The Platform on Digital Economy and New Value Creation helps companies leverage technology to be agile in the face of disruption and to create the new digitally enabled business models for a new normal – post-COVID, purpose driven, sustainable and inclusive. […] An estimated 70% of new value created in the economy over the next decade will be based on digitally enabled platform business models. However, 47% of the world’s population remain unconnected to the internet.’ – Shaping the Future of Digital Economy and New Value Creation and the Davos Agenda Digital identity Frameworks.
In How digital identity can improve lives in a post-COVID-19 world, the WEF states that, ‘To re-boot the global economy and re-connect society physically and virtually in a new reality, people will need to engage physically and digitally with public authorities and businesses.’
The World Economic Forum is encouraging domestic policymakers to ‘move quickly’ and build ‘trust’ with citizens around the secure usage of personal data, which allows extensive third parties to create digital frameworks previously forbidden by privacy laws.
‘But the potential is bigger: the possibility to safely claim who we are will impact how we live and how fast the world economy can recover – alleviating key risks highlighted in World Economic Forum’s COVID-19 Risk Outlooks Report.’
The linked Outlooks Report (tied to the Global Risks Report) seeks to keep the changes made during Covid rather than encouraging business and society to return to its in-person, normal operation. This is no doubt because the biggest winners under Covid were digital services and banks who profited off an unsustainable economic model almost entirely propped up with public money. To encourage this system would be a catastrophic error.
This report includes the header ‘An opportunity to build back better’,directly connecting the Liberal Party’s Australian Digital Identity to the hated ‘build back better’ global mantra. It also forms part of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and, littered through the supplementary data, are references and intentions to eventually incorporate the global Digital Identity into Climate Change policy.
‘Despite the grim economic outlook, the solidarity created by the Covid-19 pandemic offers the possibility of investing in building more cohesive, inclusive and equal societies. When it comes to the environmental agenda, the implementation of green stimulus programmes holds the potential to fundamentally change the way economies and industries operate, especially as societal behaviour change may spur more sustainable consumption and mobility habits. For businesses, the opportunity exists to accelerate a transformation towards more sustainable and digital operating models, while enhancing productivity. When it comes to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, technology has demonstrably helped societies manage crisis and provided a window into the benefits of more technology-enhanced ways of learning, working and producing – from telemedicine to logistics to the knowledge economy. There is a potential for a new era of innovation, growth and enhanced technology governance in the service of societal and environmental goals.’
To be clear, the WEF is the backbone from which the Australian government is drafting Digital Identity policy and the assumptions made by the WEF to justify their recommendations are, frankly, wrong – both historically and logically. To give one example, the need for swift digitisation is based on a prediction that nationalistic tendencies driven by competition for pandemic resources will see countries isolate themselves from the global market and sink into recession. We know from history that nations do the reverse – they expand into trade after traumatic events and the less intervention from global authorities, the better as countries find their economic niches mores quickly.
The Australian government do not challenge any of these assumptions, but rather assumed them as fact with the WEF’s recommendations littered throughout the Bill.
Part of this framework is a concept called ‘Human-centric digital identities’ – which is essentially what the Australian government is attempting to create as a form of ‘alleviation from global health risks’. The description of Trusted Digital Identity in the linked WEF policy is nearly identical to the Australian legislation.
The other WEF reference made is to Reimagining Digital Identity: A Strategic Imperative, which is more of the same except it summarises the other nations creating their own Digital Identities and includes a few worrying insights.
‘Businesses must understand that they will be required to redesign and rethink their relationships with their customers to remain competitive in a changing business landscape. As user expectations change regarding how digital identity is managed, organisations must reposition themselves regarding how they interact with their customers. And the time to act is now. The digital identity revolution has already begun.’
At which point we can point to the Australian government’s Digital Economy roadmap which says:
‘We’ll be succeeding when:
Which, if you read carefully, attempts to end anonymous cash transactions within the economy under the excuse of ‘progress, efficiency and safety’, removing the essential liberty of customers and businesses to purchase goods and services without heavy-handed oversight.
The recurring theme throughout these documents is that in order to be ‘safe’ and expand after Covid, the government must forge a new digital economy. In reality, a heavily regulated economy is less resilient and slower to recover than an old fashioned chaotic one. This is probably why a black economy in Australia is on the rise (suggested by the staggering increase in physical cash circulation) as individuals seek to recover their jobs outside the inflexible layers of cost and regulation ill-suited to a disaster. The government puts the cash increase down to pandemic hoarding, but it is far more likely that those individuals ‘locked out of the economy’ by state governments are having to find ways to survive. Instead of fixing the environment that has caused this behaviour, the government seeks further regulation to prevent it.
The Bill simply introduces itself as, ‘A Bill for an Act to establish the ‘trusted’ Digital Identity system and to provide for the accreditation of entities in relation to digital identity systems generally, and for related purposes.’
In order words, it creates a Digital Identity, sets out how other digital entities can interact with it, creates code of conduct guidelines, and puts forward some general (but by no means exhaustive) application processes, and lists penalties for failing to comply. The word ‘trusted’ is in the title to represent the ‘trusted’ accreditation process that the Bill sets out for third parties to access citizen data. Finally, the Bill sets out an Oversight Authority to monitor the system.
The vast majority of this Bill deals with the technical nature of accrediting digital businesses to interact with your data. Instead, we wish to ask if the Bill should exist as a concept.
Forgetting the more serious consequences of the Bill, does it actually achieve what it sets out to do? The answer is, ‘no’. Based solely on its primary aims, the Bill is a failure of concept.
There are two stated purposes for the Bill’s existence.
Instead of fixing the government’s disjoined, outdated, and woefully error-laden databases, Digital Identity acts as a band-aid.
It creates a brand new central identity and collects information from the same broken databases. Third party applications then talk to the Digital Identity, where all the information is nicely ordered for modern systems. The Digital Identity did not fix the problem – those databases are stilling heading toward failure. Why not simply spend the billions of dollars allocated to this project to fix the master databases? Or at least fix the databases before using the mess as the foundation for Australia’s largest digital environment…
A good Bill would simplify and reduce government databases, this Bill vastly extends government-held private data into a wide range of accredited domestic and international corporations who can, upon exemption, host data on foreign servers.
This data – crucial to the safety and identity of an individual – is now collated under the Digital Identity where it is shared, used, and hosted by corporate entities for a range of unspecified reasons related to government services, research, and economic practices. The Bill even lists the potential for these services to charge citizens an access fee for their data.
The main selling point on the Digital Identity website is the time people will save.
These promises are unlikely, given the experience and difficulty with both myGovID (created by the same company given the contract for Digital Identity) and the service trouble experienced with vaccine passport certification – the Trusted Digital Identity will probably take people longer to set up and fix than the total time saved by its existence. The government’s time-saving problems do not factor in any difficulties in service which are not part of the current system.Once passed, Digital Identity will be used as a way to validate transactions in the same way that a Vaccine Passport unlocks access to previously unregulated areas.
The Bill is careful to insist that its use will remain voluntary, but the accompanying documentation implies that Digital Identity is a mandatory condition of service in the economy in the same way that vaccine passports are ‘implied’ as mandatory if you wish to continue trading.
‘Digital Identity will give Australian people and businesses a single, secure way to use government services online. Creating a Digital Identity is like doing a 100-point identification check. It removes the need to visit a shopfront with your identity documents. Digital Identity is already being used by over 2.3 million Australians and 1.2 million businesses to access over 75 government services. Digital Identity ensures personal information is securely encrypted and stored in Australia and no personal information is presented through a double blind system. The proposed new legislation for the Digital Identity system will extend these protections and standards to businesses and state and territory governments who will use the digital identity.’
And then it sets out this Digital Identity as a government-controlled protection for fraud against private digital transactions:
‘The Trusted Digital Identity Framework sets out the rules for the national digital identity scheme. This Framework will make it easier and safer for people to access online services and provide additional protections against identity crime, which is estimated to cost the economy over $3.1 billion a year. The Government will progress legislation to enable the rollout of the Framework to the private sector and other governments. The legislation will embed privacy, security and fraud prevention mechanisms to build trust and confidence by those who choose to participate.’
And finally, from the Digital Economy Strategy:
A digital economy is characterised by online transactions and engagement – a virtual, paperless and cashless world […] This means that by 2030:
And for individuals:
• The significant majority of Australians over 18 are registered for myGovID or another trusted digital identity.
While not explicitly stated in the Bill, if the government’s Digital Economy Strategy by 2030 is aiming for all business transactions to be digital (no cash), and those transactions require the integrated and secure Digital Identification check to validate them – then those who do not partake in the Digital Identity scheme will be effectively locked out of the economy.
The Digital Economy Strategy also states: ‘To be a leading digital economy and society in 2030, every business needs to become a digital business.’
Casual Coal Wage TheftFebruary 21, 2024 - 2:09 pmOver $30,000 a year being stolen, and it’s been signed off by the union and the government. Find out about the largest wage theft from casuals in Australia.
My Other IssuesFebruary 16, 2021 - 12:08 pm
Murray Darling BasinMarch 23, 2020 - 3:05 am
Foreign OwnershipOctober 16, 2019 - 4:58 am
Property rightsOctober 16, 2019 - 4:39 am
United Nations #AUSEXITOctober 16, 2019 - 2:31 am