2007/11 Should the Australian Government introduce the Health and Social Services Access Card?<BR>

2006-2007 Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window

Related issue outlines:
2005/20: ID cards: should Australia introduce a national identity card?

Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).

Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis

Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
access
card

Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald

Search for listed newspaper items online - see end of this page

2007/11 Should the Australian Government introduce the Health and Social Services Access Card?<BR>

2007/11: Should the Australian Government introduce the Health and Social Services Access Card?

What they said ...
'It is important the government delivers on its objective of providing Australians with a modern, convenient and secure way of delivering health and social services'
The federal Minister for Human Services, Senator Chris Ellison

'We do not support the approach where all personal information is centralised on one database, and a single form of identification is issued. This could increase the risk of fraud because only one document would need to be counterfeited to establish identity'
The federal Attorney General, Philip Ruddock

The issue at a glance
On April 26th, 2006, the Prime Minister, John Howard, announced that his Government would introduce a Health and Social Services Access Card over a two year period, beginning in 2008.
The Government was careful to insist that this was not intended to be an Australian ID card, similar to the Australia Card, which the Hawke Labor Government had unsuccessfully attempted to introduce in 1987.
Critics of the Access Card argue that it either is or will become a national ID card, that it represents a threat to personal privacy and that it will not be able to deliver the administrative advantages claimed for it.
On March 15, 2007, the progress of the Human Services (enhanced service delivery) Bill 2007 through Parliament was temporarily halted. The Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee which had been charged with reviewing the Bill presented a highly critical report recommended it be substantially redrafted.
The debate surrounding the Access Card continues.

Background
(Much of the following background is an abbreviated version of information found in Wikipedia's entry for the Australian Access Card. This can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_social_services_access_card_(Australia))

The Health and Social Services Access Card has been proposed by the Australian Government. The Prime Minister, John Howard, announced its introduction on Wednesday 26 April 2006.
It is proposed that any Australian Citizen or Permanent Resident wishing to access services administered by the Department of Human Services, Department of Veterans Affairs or the universal Medicare system will need to acquire one. The card will be phased in over two years, beginning in 2008.
Services to be accessed with the card include:
Welfare benefits, as administered by Centrelink, including unemployment, disability, veterans and study allowances. The services currently accessed through the Health Care Card and Seniors Health Card will also be drawn on using the Access Card, as will Medicare subsidised health care, both bulk-billing and claim back.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), which provides subsidised medications to those on low incomes will also be accessed using the card and so will Child Support Agency Australia services CRS Australia's vocational rehabilitation

The Government established a Consumer and Privacy Taskforce under former competition commission head Prof Allan Fels. The first report by the Taskforce was released in September 2006. The Government rejected or partly rejected four of the 26 recommendations made by the taskforce.

The Bill to effect the first stage of the Access Card implementation is the Human Services (enhanced service delivery) Bill 2007. A Senate Inquiry started on February 8th 2007 to investigate the Bill. The Committee's report was delivered on 15th March 2007. It was highly critical of the Bill in its present form and demanded it be redrawn and substantially reworked. The Report also strongly recommended that the oversight and privacy provisions not await a later unseen Bill but be included in one package.
The Minister, Senator Chris Ellison, has withdrawn the Bill to implement the Committee's recommendations.

The Access Card is a Smartcard, containing a microchip rather than a simple magnetic strip. This means that instead of the card containing a number that relates to a record in a database, the data (usually encrypted) is actually stored on the card.

The Card is intended to have a photograph, the usual name of the holder, the signature, the expiry date and the ID Number will all be visible on the front or rear of the Card. The chip is expected to include your legal name, address, date of birth, details of children or other dependants, digitised photo, signature, card number, expiry date, gender, concession status and your Personal Identification Number (PIN). Additional personal information can also be added at the will of the card holder

Registration will require an interview that is planned to average 12 minutes. At the Interview a bio-metric photo will be taken along with full documentation to prove you are the person you claim to be (birth certificates, credit cards, bills etc - similar to the 100 point financial services test) will need to be shown and copied for permanent storage. This will occur at special offices in the initial two year registration period, after that at selected Post Offices at every seven year renewal

The United Kingdom is also introducing a non-compulsory identity card: the British national identity card. France has had a similar, but less sophisticated, card for many years: the French national identity card. Some other European and Asian nations have national identity cards.

Internet Information
On January 28, 2007, the ABC's Radio National current affairs program Background Briefing broadcast a program featuring views for and against the introduction of the Access Card. A full transcript of this program can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2007/1835583.htm

Caslon Analytics is an Australian research, analysis and strategies consultancy, with a particular interest in technology and regulation. They advise government bodies, businesses and individuals. They have produced a detailed background paper making comparisons between the Access Card and the 1987 Australia Card. The extensive clickable index for their treatment of the two cards can be found at http://www.caslon.com.au/australiacardprofile.htm

On November 11, 2006, Professor of Law at Sydney University, Graeme Greenleaf, had published a paper titled, 'Australia's proposed ID card: still quacking like a duck'. The Professor argues that the Access Card is essentially a national ID card and he demonstrates what he considers are the dangers of instituting such a means of personal identification.
The full text of the opinion piece can be found at http://www.bakercyberlawcentre.org/privacy/id_card/CLSR_OzCard_compare.pdf

On January 19, 2007, the Australian Medical Association (AMA) released its submission to the Taskforce reviewing the exposure draft of the Access Card Bill.
The AMA has a variety of concerns about the Access Card, including what it believes is the unnecessary nature of the card and the fact that it may disadvantage a variety of user groups. The AMA's views can be found at http://www.ama.com.au/web.nsf/doc/WEEN-6XL6YZ

On February 17, 2007, the British newspaper The Guardian produced a detailed overview of the Australian Government's proposed Access Card titled, 'Call it what you like..."Human Services Access Card" a gross violation of civil rights. Though much of the article is factual, it has an overall bias against the card. The full text of the article has been reproduced at http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve07/1307card2.html

Electronic Frontiers Australia (AFA), a lobby group opposed to the introduction of the Access Card, has a large section of its site given over to backgrounding and presenting arguments from a variety of sources against the card. A clickable and annotated index to this section of EFA's site can be found at http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/accesscard.html

On December 13, 2007, the then Minister for Human Services, Joe Hockey, issued a media release explaining when and why his Government planned to introduce the Health and Community Services Access Card. The full text of this media release can be found at http://www.humanservices.gov.au/media/releases/061213.htm

On February 1, 2007, the then Minister for Human Services, Senator Ian Campbell, was interviewed on 6PR Perth. In the interview the Minister answers some criticisms of the Access Card and explains what his Government hopes to achieve via the card's introduction. The full text of this interview can be found at http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/news/Article.aspx?ID=1375

The Department of Human Services has produced a range of materials explaining how the Access Card would operate and what its advantages would be. One part of its site presents a number of illustrative examples which show how different sections of the community might be advantaged by the introduction of the card. These examples can be found at http://www.humanservices.gov.au/modules/resources/reports/2006-07_access_card_case_studies.pdf

The Australian Government has established an Internet site to explain and promote the Access Card. It gives simple explanations of how the card would work and what its benefits would be. This information can be found at http://www.accesscard.gov.au/

Arguments against the introduction of an Access Card
1. The proposed privacy provisions must be outlined together with the bill to implement the Access Card
Critics of the Access Card have been disturbed by the manner in which the federal Government has proposed to introduce it. The Card was intended to be introduced via a two stage process: the card was first be accepted in principle via a bill that explained some of the functions it would perform and the manner in which it was to be gradually put in place. Later legislation was then to have been drafted to explain the detail of the privacy provisions which would ensure that the information contained on the Card was not misused.
The Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee chaired by Liberal Brett Mason, said it was unable to fully assess the Card because legislation covering its privacy and security safeguards had not yet been put before the Parliament.
The Committee recommended the legislation be rewritten to include the privacy provisions, which the Government had planned to introduce down the track.
Civil Liberties groups have viewed with suspicion the federal Government's failure to spell out the privacy and security provisions that would apply in relation to the Access Card. Such critics of the Card believe that the original absence of security and privacy provisions indicates that the Government does not attach sufficient importance to those aspects of the Card.
(The recommendations of the Senate Committee have delayed the introduction of the Access Card legislation which when it is subsequently introduced will include detailed security and privacy provisions.)

2. There is scope for the card to be used beyond its original purposes
There is concern that the purposes for which the card might be employed will expand into areas where people could be disadvantaged through its use. Card users could have their privacy violated in ways which would, for example, make it more difficult for them to obtain a loan or a job.
This is generally referred to as 'function creep', meaning that the card will come to be used for purposes other than those for which it was first designed.
Former human services minister, Joe Hockey, who originally promoted the Access Card, has indicated that the Federal Government would use only about 40 per cent of the card's memory capacity. He noted that the card could store a wide range of additional information.
Mr Hockey stated that the card would have a computer chip with the capacity to secure information detailing the commercial activity between the "government and the people and even perhaps between the people and commerce."
Julian Burnside, the president of Liberty Victoria, has claimed that it was inevitable the State and Federal governments would tap into the opportunities presented by the new Access Card.
Mr Burnside has stated, "The fact is, functions which the card can handle will be placed on it. That is just the way things are and no guarantees from any present government protect us against that future possibility."
The Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee, chaired by Liberal Brett Mason, warned the high-tech Access Card was likely to become a de facto national identity card, despite measures aimed at limiting its scope.
Liberal MP, Mr Steven Ciobo, who recently returned from a study tour of Britain to see how its new identity card worked, said he was also worried it would be "only a matter of time before banks and airlines (who may use the access card to verify a person's ID) want to access the Government databases to verify it's your card. And that's a very slippery slope."
As an early instance of such 'function creep' ASIO has already declared that it would have automatic access to the Access Card's data register.

3. The card is effectively compulsory
It has been claimed that the Government's statement that use of the Access Card will be voluntary is misleading. Melbourne academic and writer, Leslie Cannold, has argued, 'It is disingenuous to say that participation in the new identity card system is voluntary. No card means no Medicare rebates, PBS medicines, Centrelink payments, veteran's pensions, disability benefits, carers' payments, baby bonus, AusStudy, unemployment benefits or related concessions on public transport and utility bills. Unless we are independently wealthy, we will need to sign up.'
The same point has been made by the Health Issues Centre (HIC), an independent, non-profit organisation which promotes consumer perspectives in the Australian health system. In a submission to the Access Card Consumer and Privacy Taskforce HIC stated, 'The Commonwealth Government says that the card is not compulsory, but in order to receive Centrelink benefits, government hospital treatment or claim for Medicare, a card will be necessary after 2010. It is therefore difficult to imagine many Australians not "choosing" to register for one eventually, as the "choice" not to have a card by 2010 is a "choice" not to participate in the Medicare system to which all taxpayers are required to contribute.
Government arguments have also suggested that if there was a natural disaster or similar emergency, people might be able to access emergency payments via ATMs or EFTPOS using the card, again implying that having a card might be a practical necessity.'

4. The information on the card could be illegally accessed or improperly used
The Government cannot guarantee that the privacy and security provisions it attaches to the Access Card's database will be adhered to.
There have been a number of recent instances of databases being improperly used. For example, databases at the Australian Taxation Office, Centrelink, the NSW Road Traffic Authority and the Victorian Office of Police Integrity have all been inappropriately accessed. It is claimed that no protective legislation designed to guarantee the proper use of official data can be completely relied upon and further that the more data there is the greater the temptation for someone to use it inappropriately.
It has been claimed that by creating a national identity register, with links to various other government databases, the proposed ID card will vastly increase such opportunities for misuse.
The Australian Privacy Foundation, in a submission to the federal Parliament argued that any claims about data security should be critically assessed 'in light of the experience of previous technology projects, and in light of the inevitability of human error and of some level of unauthorised use and disclosure. No systems can be guaranteed 100% secure and accurate, and the public is entitled to know what the consequences of the inevitable security breaches and quality failures might be.'

5. The card could increase the disadvantage of the poor and socially, physically or intellectually disadvantaged
It has been suggested that the Access Card will discriminate against the already disadvantaged. Anna Johnston, 'No ID Card' Campaign Director for the Australian Privacy Foundation has stated, 'I believe that this proposal will ... entrench social disadvantage for those people who currently struggle with producing evidence of their identity - in particular, remote indigenous communities, homeless people, people with
disabilities, and people of non-English speaking backgrounds ...
The plan for people who cannot produce adequate evidence of their identity is to issue them with an Access Card that includes a flag, indicating 'low confidence' in their identity. That to me says you will be branded as a second-class citizen. It will likely lead to both "service denial" and "identity denial".'
A similar point was made in a submission to the Department of Human Services from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, 'Some groups may not be adequately dealt with under standard registration and use processes.
Where, for instance, the access card is made the sole means of access to government services, an itinerant person who does not typically carry cards on their person would be placed at a disadvantage.
The policy implications of adapting the access card to minority groups require further consideration.'
The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has also indicated its concern that the Access Card will disadvantage young people. The AMA has stated, 'The AMA holds very serious concerns about the requirement that individuals must be at least 18 years old in order to hold an Access card (unless granted one of the limited and highly discretionary exemptions provided for under clause 310).
We do not see the point of this provision, or what purpose or benefit there can be in limiting the availability of the card to those over the age of 18. There are many people under that age who live independently and this will have a completely unnecessary and highly adverse impact on their ability to access services and benefits ... In particular this will have a dramatic adverse effect on younger persons with concessional status - many of whom may have poor relationships with their nominal guardians or living independently of them.'

6. The card could be fraudulently copied
It has been argued that the Access Card will not be the protection against welfare fraud that its defenders claim. Critics suggest that any card can be replicated. Therefore, the more services to which the Card gives a holder access, the greater the potential is for a forged card to be used to claim entitlements fraudulently.
Liberal MP, Mr Steven Ciobo, who recently returned from a study tour of Britain to see how its new identity card worked, has claimed, 'I have no doubt that the access card will and can be fraudulently reproduced in the future.
The notion that in some way this card is unable to be forged is wrong. It of course can be and will be forged and in that respect, production of the access card as a form of identity verification is of no consequence whatsoever.'
Electronic Frontiers Australia, a group opposed to the introduction of the Access Card, have stated, 'The Access Card system poses the same risk of increased fraud, including identity fraud and identity theft, because it involves centralising all personal information on one database and issuing a single form of identification to replace the existing health services card (Medicare) and the existing welfare and social service cards (Centrelink and Department of Veterans' Affairs).
An unprecedented amount of personal information about some 18 million Australians will be placed in one centralised database and people will be issued with a single form of identification required to be used to prove identity in order to obtain Federal and State/Territory Government benefits and services and that may also be voluntarily used to prove identity to businesses.
Such a plan is fundamentally flawed because it produces a "honey pot effect" - a highly attractive and richly rewarding target for criminals. Instead of needing to gain entry to a number of databases containing identity information and produce fake copies of a number of identity documents, there is a single target.'
As recently as last year, Philip Ruddock, Australia's Attorney General, was reported to have said, 'We do not support the approach where all personal information is centralised on one database, and a single form of identification is issued.
This could increase the risk of fraud because only one document would need to be counterfeited to establish identity.'

7. The card will be expensive to implement
It has been suggested that the Government's estimates as to the cost and relative financial benefits of introducing the Access Card are either incomplete or inaccurate.
The Access Card No Way lobby group has produced a submission in which it stated, 'The net benefit stated [by the Government] ... is $3,000 million over ten years; a period in which $1,000,000 million will be expended on the relevant programmes. Therefore even if the undisclosed workings on the best-case scenario are correct then this scheme will save 0.3% of outlays.
The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) has noted these estimates do not include the cost to industry of keeping and securing any pertinent data from the
Access scheme ... [further there seems to be no] mention of the cost to other levels of Government of dealing with storage, collection and privacy regimes that will be required. This should be of immediate concern to the Federal Government as they now fund the lower two tiers of Government and these costs must be included in any cost benefit analysis.
The UK ID Card scheme is estimated to now cost 18,000 million pounds or three times the estimates of six months ago. It should be a lesson to those who wish to set open ended technical requirements on Government and the Health professions in implementing the Access Card.'

Arguments in favour of the introduction of an Access Card
1. The Access Card will be more convenient for the card holder
The Government has claimed that the new Access Card will be more efficient for those who use Government services. The principal benefit for the average citizen is said to be that of consolidation. Where currently there are 17 individual cards enabling people to access different Government services, the new Access Card would allow these services to be accessed with the one proof of identity and entitlement. Though no person is likely to carry 17 cards, it is possible that an individual could need to access three or four different forms of Government service and so need to carry three or four different cards. It is claimed that the new system would reduce the inconvenience of this.
The Office of Access Card Internet site states among the benefits of the Card, 'Quick and simple verification of who you are when you deal with us; updates to your details, such as address, need only be made at one of our agencies [and] reducing the number of cards in your purse or wallet.'
The Human Services Minister, Chris Ellison, has stated, 'The access card offers considerable benefits and it is important the government delivers on its objective of providing Australians with a modern, convenient and secure way of delivering health and social services.'
The former Human Services Minister, Senator Ian Campbell, stated, 'Well the plan is to use the best technology, what's called the Smart Card technology, whereby you can effectively in a very small chip, inside the card, have important information, not just so that you do get your Medicare payments, that you do get your Centrelink payments and you can have one card, instead of potentially up to 17 different benefit cards, and concession cards that are available at the moment, and have all of that information in one convenient card.'
The Department of Human Services Internet site gives the following fictional illustration of how a single card could make service delivery more convenient. '"Edna" is a 72 year old pensioner who has a number of health concerns, and on average visits a doctor or pharmacy at least once a week. In order to access her health and social services benefits, Edna carries her Medicare card, pensioner's card and a hearing voucher.
Edna could replace all of these items with the single access card-she would have
fewer cards to carry, it would be more convenient for her and there would be less
confusion about which card she needs. The card would clearly identify Edna through
a digital photograph on the card and her signature on the back and show that Edna is
entitled to subsidised or free medicines.'
The card holder can also choose to use the surplus capacity on the card to store additional information. This information could include: emergency contact details, allergies, organ donor status and date of birth. If the card holder is a carer, or is cared for by another person, this information could also be stored on the smartcard's chip.

2. The Access Card will be simpler and more efficient for service providers
It has been noted that the Access Card will be more convenient for service providers. The provision of a photograph either on the chip or on the surface of the card will make accurate identification of benefit recipients quick and easy.
It has also been noted that it will be possible for any relevant service provider to amend a client's personal details, for example their address, on the spot and that this amendment will then be carried on the Card and transferred to the central register so that if the card holder then has to visit another Government service provider, that second provider will have immediate access to the new, updated information.

3. The privacy of card users will be protected
The Government has repeatedly stated its determination that the individual card user's privacy will be protected. The Office of Access Card's Internet site states, 'Current laws such as the Privacy Act 1988 protect the way your personal information is handled by the Government. If these laws are breached, sanctions including criminal penalties may apply. These laws will apply to the access card.
The Privacy Act 1988 ensures you know why your personal information is being collected, if the information is authorised or required under any law and who it will usually be given to.
You have a legally enforceable right to get access to your records. You are able to apply to have inaccurate information about you amended; and information about you can only be used for the purpose it is collected except for particular reasons, such as threats to life or health.'
The same site also states, 'Other protections in the Crimes Act 1914 and the Public Service Code of Conduct will also apply to prevent unauthorised access and use of information.
While the offence provisions provide strong consumer protections, additional protection of information will be specified in subsequent legislation. On 7 February the Minister for Human Services announced that he has asked Professor Fels to undertake a Privacy Impact Assessment before issues around privacy are resolved in subsequent legislation.'
The Office of Access Card's Internet site further states, 'Your personal information will be protected by legislation. There will be strict controls over how agency staff can view your information. All access will be logged and audited.
Unlike your driver's licence, which has most of your personal details clearly visible, the new smartcard will securely store most of your information on the chip.
What is stored on the chip will be kept on the registration service.
There will be no single database holding all your health and social service details. Your agency-specific information will stay where it currently is, with that agency.
So when you present your smartcard to agency staff, for example at Medicare, they will only see the information which is relevant to the services that agency delivers.'
Further it is noted, 'No financial information, health records or your Tax File Number will be on the smartcard, in the chip or held by the registration service.'

4. The supposed 'right to privacy' and to protect our identity is already limited
It has been claimed that our right to privacy in relation to our identity is already limited.
Government identification of citizens and others for financial, security and other purposes did not begin with the Australia Card which the Hawke Government attempted to introduce in 1987 nor with the new proposed Access Card. The Australia Card was a replication and extension of past and current identity cards and registration schemes as is the Access Card.
Drivers licences and passports, though not originally intended for general use for identification purposes, have now assumed that role.
Comprehensive civil registration (first complementing and subsequently superseding the registration by religious organisations of births, baptisms, marriages and deaths) has existed in Australia for over 150 years. It commenced in England in 1837 and in Tasmania in 1838.
Commencement dates for civil registration in Australia are as follows: 1838 -Tasmania,1841 - Western Australia,1842 - South Australia,1853 - Victoria,1856 -
NSW,1856 - Queensland,1870 - Northern Territory and 1930 - Australian Capital Territory.
Defenders of an Access Card claim that it does little more than consolidate information and forms of identification which the average citizen is already expected to have. It has been suggested that functioning as part of a complicated society inevitably means that some of an individual's private details may periodically have to be made known to some others.

5. Administrative errors will be less likely
It has been claimed that administrative errors centring on mistaken identity would be far less likely once the Access Card is introduced. The case used to illustrate this point is that of Cornelia Rau, a permanent resident in Australia, who was mistakenly detained as an illegal immigrant for ten months in 2004-5.
The national database on which the Access Card would rely would allow data on the card, including a photograph of the card holder stored in an electronic chip, to be compared with that individual's photograph stored on the central databank
Biometric technology will enable the photograph to be instantly matched with the image stored on the national database. The secretary of the Department of Human Services, Ms Patricia Scott, has claimed that biometric photographs would 'dramatically improve' the ability of authorities .to respond to cases like Rau's.
Scott has stated, 'We are confident that if Cornelia had been registered and had a card, we would have been able to find her in our system.'
The same point was made by then Human Services Minister, Ian Campbell, who suggested, 'The access card could have prevented the Cornelia Rau episode.'

6. Ownership of the card will be retained by the card holder
The Government has argued that the prevention of the misuse of the card and control of the information it contains will be enhanced by the card remaining the property of the person to whom the card is issued.
The Explanatory Memorandum for the Human Services (Advanced Service Delivery) Bill 2007 indicated that 'The Bill will vest ownership of the card in the card holder. This is intended to provide greater choice to individuals about the uses to which they might choose to put the card other than for health and social service purposes. The card belongs to the card owner and he or she can use the card for whatever lawful purpose they choose.'
The former Human Services Minister, Joe Hockey, who was the minister originally responsible for the introduction of the Access Card stated, 'Australians can be confident that their identity will be secure on the card because they will retain "ownership" of the card and information.
Your card will be unique to you. It will have your photo on it so no one else can use it. This will be a more secure system to protect people's identity.'

7 . The Access card will reduce government services fraud
It has been claimed that the Access Card will be more reliable means of identifying those who are entitled to Government assistance and also of determining the level of assistance to which they are entitled.
The former Human Services Minister, Senator Ian Campbell, has stated, 'The Medicare card, just for a bit of history, came out in 1984, so it's a very old bit of technology. About 50% of all fraud that occurs in Australia is by people manufacturing Medicare cards. For example, I was told yesterday where a lady had invented the identity of nine sets of twins and defrauded the system for $690,000, so that's how antiquated the current Medicare card is. So that's really one of the things we're trying to fix ... [Please note: The Minister's source for these statistics is not given which makes it difficult to verify them. Issue outline writer.]'
The Department of Human Services Internet site gives the following instances of welfare or benefit fraud and explains how an Access card might reduce the instance of such practices. The site states, 'Fraud is a multi-billion dollar problem in Australia and is on the increase. Australian Government health and social services fraud alone is some $2 billion annually. The media is full of cases of people who have been caught and prosecuted for various types of fraud related to health and social services benefits.
For example:
In 2003, a deregistered doctor in Queensland used 21 stolen identities involving Medicare cards to obtain a morphine-based prescription drug which he used to stockpile tablets with a street value of $2 million.
A recently reported case in the media involved a woman who defrauded Centrelink of over $73,000 between 1997 and 2004. During this time she dishonestly obtained a sole-parent pension, parenting payments and family benefits.
... With the access card, people would have to register for the card in order to claim any benefits. The registration process would require them to provide proof of their identity and would involve a photograph being taken which is stored on the front of their access card, in the chip on the card and within the secure customer registration system...
The access card will play an important role in preventing fraud, up front. It will ensure that tax payers money only goes to people who are entitled to receive it.'
Biometric provisions of the Access Card will help to protect against fraud. Biometrics refers to technology that measures and analyses physical characteristics for authentication purposes.
For the Access Card, biometric technology measures characteristics of the individual's photograph, such as the distance between pupils. It is virtually impossible for two people to share the same biometric facial characteristics. In this way photograph confirmation can ensure that the Access Card identity information has not been interfered with.

Further implications
There seem to be two orders of criticism directed at the Access Card. The first set of objections are immediate and practical, while the second set are somewhat more theoretical and will take a little longer to come into play.
On a purely practical level there are those, such as the AMA, who dispute the necessity and the practicality of the proposed card. They, and a number of others, argue that it will act against certain groups in the community, such as minors and the socially and economically disadvantaged.
There are also those who argue that the whole system will be very expensive to implement and that it will not deliver the degree of benefit claimed. It is noted, for example, that there would be no one now having to carrying 17 cards to access the 17 different forms of welfare/medical support supplied by various agencies receiving federal Government funding. Currently, the very largest number of cards any individual is likely to have to carry would be three or four. Critics argue the Access Card is an expensive and complicated means of removing a few cards from individuals' wallets.
The second, more theoretical set of objections centre around possible violations of individuals' privacy and the manner in which this new system could be exploited by Governments, private enterprise and criminals.
It seems difficult not to accept the view that even if the Access Card is not currently intended to become a national ID card, then it will ultimately become this. Its universality, its detailed information and improved security features seem to make it a logical form of identification to use.
There are those who are concerned that a card carrying a large amount of varied information about each Australian citizen and resident represents a threat to privacy. Both the card and the central register to which it is connected give governments a far greater capacity to track the behaviour of individuals and groups within our population. There are those who do not trust any agency with this sort of access to information and fear that it may ultimately be used by federal police and other groups in ways that could, for example, reduce individuals' right to protest. There is also concern that this information may be commercially exploited or that it could become a target for large scale organised crime. Obviously many of these concerns are just projections of possibilities that the Access Card represents.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Age: September 1, page 3, news item by Annabel Stafford, `Privacy watchdog wants smartcard guarantees'
The Herald-Sun: October 14, page 7, news item by Giles and Mickelburough, `Public servant snoops'
The Australian: November 8, page 6, news item by Steve Lewis, `Libs to launch people's ID card'
The Age: November 8, page 7, news item by Annabel Stafford, `Smartcard laws to act on privacy'
The Age: January 17, page 17, comment by Joe Hockey, `Your privacy is assured'
The Age: January 17, page 16, editorial, `Too smart by half: privacy is still at risk'
The Age: January 15, page 11, comment by Leslie Cannold, `Privacy should be our choice'
The Age: January 25, page 14, news item by Annabel Stafford, `Race quiz concern on smartcard'
The Age: January 23, page 6, news item by Annabel Stafford, `AMA raps access card legislation'
The Australian: February 7, page 4, news item by Brad Norington, `Medicare off limits without smartcard'
The Australian: February 7, page 1, news item by Maiden and Norington, `Coalition MPs attack ID card'
The Age: February 7, page 14, news item by Annabel Stafford, `Backbench revolt on health smartcard'
The Australian: February 14, page 6, news item by Sandra Maiden, `ALP wants more smartcard privacy'
The Age: February 14, page 15, comment by Michael Pearce, `Your ID? It's on the card'
The Australian: February 12, page 8, comment by Jim Nolan, `Heading for an identity crisis'
The Age: February 11, page 7, news item (with boxed information) by Jason Dowling, `Access Card guarantees "won't protect us"'
The Herald-Sun: February 9, page 24, editorial, `Calm card fears'
The Age: February 9, page 15, analysis by Karen Kissane, `Access for whom?'
The Herald-Sun: March 15, page 15, news item by Ben Packham, `Access card to hit hip pocket'
The Australian: March 16, page 1, news item by Cath Hart, `Access Card scheme stalls'
The Age: March 16, page 8, news item by Stafford and Nguyen, `Access Card vote halted by privacy doubts'
The Age: March 24, page 6, news item by Jewel Topsfield, `Access Card could be hacked'
The Age: April 10, page 13, comment by Christopher Scanlon, `We've given away our privacy, a card's just the final blow'

Using google to find newspaper items still available on the Web
Use your mouse to copy a newspaper headline (just the headline, not the entire entry as it appears in the sources) and paste it into the google search box below. Click search to see if the item is still accessible.