Caslon Analytics elephant logo title for Australia Card profile
home | about | site use | resources | publications | timeline |::| Analysphere | Ketupa

overview

identifiers

precursors

1980s

surrogates

2006

claims

costs

models

private

register

UHI

TFN/ABN

police

attitudes

futures

FAQs

studies

landmarks













related pages icon
related
Profiles:

Australian
privacy
regimes


Official
Registers


Human
Rights


Australian
Constitution
& Cyberspace


100 Points
Scheme


Forgery &
Forensics


Identity
Theft


Biometrics












section heading icon     overseas models

This page considers overseas models for national identification schemes in Australia.

It covers -

section marker icon     introduction

Overseas development of national identity card schemes and entitlement card schemes is of interest because experience in other countries provides -

  • benchmarks for community acceptance of mandatory and non-mandatory security cards and entitlement cards
  • rhetoric that has been appropriated by proponents, opponents and journalists
  • indications that some technical challenges are intractible and that costs in Australia are likely to be significantly greater than optimistic estimates released by some advocates
  • perspectives on what is driving development, including institutional aggrandisement, populist resentment of 'welfare bludgers' and misplaced faith in technological solutions for social problems.

It is clear that policymakers and communities in some liberal democratic nations do not consider that a ubiquitous national identity card (including one, such as that in the Netherlands, that must be produced on demand) is necessarily totalitarian.

It is also clear that there is widespread acceptance of entitlement cards, with in some instances pressure from community groups to extend the use of entitlement cards. That pressure is unsurprising, given enthusiasm in some quarters for 'fixes' or punitive mechanisms such as online public Offender Registers.

section marker icon     what is driving development?

Global development of large-scale identity registers is being driven by several factors -

  • emulation of peers
  • political opportunism at times of perceived crisis
  • institutional aggrandisement, with agencies in all governments exhibiting a range of views
  • solution vendor enthusiasm (whether for overall systems or for particular mechanisms such as biometrics, with national registration for example seen by some observers as the saviour of the ailing 'bioidentification-industrial complex')
  • perceptions that substantial reductions in welfare fraud and other abuse of government services are achievable through strengthened registration schemes (with some analysts mooting recovery of all costs through savings over a three to five year period)
  • perceived opportunities to leverage substantial existing infrastructure and data collections
  • recognition of the scope for improved service delivery in key sectors such as health
  • recognition that the federal, state/territory and local governments already maintain a wide range of registers - highlighted here - of varying comprehensiveness and detail
  • perceptions that there is (or will be) substantial community support for mechanisms that address identity theft, terrorism and other concerns

Contrary to some of the more entertainingly conspiracist views, much development thus has a distinctly ad hoc and tentative flavour.

section marker icon     models

In considering calls for national registration benchmarks are provided by Australia's peers.

The enthusiasm with which particular states have adopted or maintained identity card schemes reflects their individual circumstances but it is clear that registering all citizens/residents (and even requiring those people to carry a card for production on demand by a range of officials) is not restricted to totalitarian states.

Liberal democracies with universal cards thus include Belgium, the Netherlands, Israel, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland and Finland.

Recent moves towards a national card in the UK have proved contentious. Canada, as noted above, has considered the utility and shape of national registration. Critic Morris Manning commented

If you have to produce a card to buy a car, to get on a plane, to travel across the country or even to walk the streets of Canada, then I believe we have changed from a free to an unfree society.

That provoked a response that most Canadians would be unfussed about using the card in purchase of a car or air ticket if the transaction was protected (Australians typically produce photo ID at airports). Requirement to carry the card for walking down the street was another matter, although of course drivers expect to carry and produce licences while on the road.






icon for link to next page   next page (private) 




this site
the web

Google

version of January 2006
© Bruce Arnold
caslon.com.au | caslon analytics