No quick profits on the cards for national ID scheme

Vendors, systems integrators and channel partners considering bidding for what appeared to be lucrative government contracts should take heed of failed national identity card proposals even though attitudes among the young meant such a scheme could get off the ground today, a Sydney biometrics conference heard yesterday.

"It's well to understand you could spend a lot of money on an access card [bid] but it can be blown out of the water if government [doesn't] handle it appropriately," former Tasmanian Labor senator Terry Aulich said at the Biometrics Institute 10th annual conference yesterday.

"I have to advise a lot of clients ... be very, very careful about the amount of time and effort you put into that bid because governments come and go and even within governments you'll have changes of mind caused by the proximity of an election and stuff ups."

Australian governments of both stripes have tried unsuccessfully to mandate a single identification card, first under Labor in 1985 and then under the Coalition 10 years later, but both attempts fell foul of public opinion and the proposals' inherent complexity.

But that could all change as a generation weaned on sharing the most intimate aspects of their lives with random strangers online came into their majority.

But the Facebook generation, unbowed by their parents' sense of privacy propriety, was fast-tracking a global identity database and was so comfortable with an Australia Card it could be introduced today.

Aulich said he was "astonished" at the variation in inter-generational  attitudes to privacy exhibited by subjects in his research.

"The young Chinese community, the Facebook generation, they loved technology, they were happy to explore other peoples space and let their own be invaded but their parents were incredibly closed," Aulich said.

"They didn't want to talk about anything to do with money, their definition of privacy was related to money. We were astonished at how quickly they were taking up technology but they had a very practical view of it. Their view about privacy was quite strong."

Aulich said that benefits such as greater speed to access information and convenience would need to be emphasised to win over public support.

Forcing citizens to pay for their ID cards or an inability of card authorities to safeguard data would derail any attempt to re-introduce a national identity scheme.

"What will happen is as the older generation move [on] the younger generation will accept what today would be seen as an invasion of privacy [in] a national identification system," he said.

"But that could be set back at any time in the decision-making process by some absolute stuff ups the way government or companies are maintaining and protecting data."

Aulich singled out the company managing Melbourne's CityLink toll road, which the media exposed when it lost thousands of commuter's credit card details to a disgruntled former employee.

"(Victorians') views of a national identification system literally dropped amazingly at the time ... you wouldn't believe how many people read a little item like that and say 'I don't think the time is right to trust governments or organisations to protect our data'."

Despite cautioning his clients not to get carried away, Aulich, who runs a security consultancy and was involved with the first Australia Card proposals, said a national and "possibly an international system" will be accepted and that Australia was leading attitudes because of the many passports issued each year - more than a million - all of which have biometric information coded on them.
All that biometric information comes at a cost.

He said he was sceptical, especially of political parties that enjoy exemptions from privacy laws, of organisations ability to protect Australians' privacy.

"I'm quite suspicious about some organisations' capacity and willingness [to use private biometric information].

As a pollster, I know the way you collect data now and back-engineer stuff; I think the invasion of privacy has gone much further than anyone imagines or understands.

When you get into [a political party's]  inner sanctum and see what they can do with that data it's amazing.

"While we've got those [privacy law] exemptions [for government, small business and media] and occasional stuff-ups, the take-up of a national identification system is not going to go at a pace."

He said that governments have a "lot to prove" to Australians before they will be trusted with such a national system: "When politicians put themselves under the Privacy Act then we'll really be cooking with gas".

The Biometrics Institute conference concludes today with presentations on iris and face recognition, identifying subjects in real-world environments and border controls.