You know, whenever a government department uses the words “more convenient”, “safer” and “more secure” in a sentence, you can be sure that it is not trying to do you a favour. These are buzz words designed to make you think they are, but the reality is they want something from you that ordinarily you might baulk at providing, so rather than say so outright, it couches the request in something that sounds like it just wants to make your life easier.
It doesn’t. What it wants is for you to pave the way for it to sticky-beak into your affairs, not because you may be up to no good, but simply because it wants to have that option and if you have handed over access without realising how far that department intends to delve into your life, you will a) never get it out again and b) have no comeback.
Biometric data (voiceprint, facial scans) is one of the worst things you can agree to give, so don’t. Right now you may be being asked by some government department or other to “volunteer” one or both of these as a “safe” and “secure” way of communicating with the department, but down the track the “voluntary” option will be removed. Either supply it or have no access unless you appear on site in person. Many may view this as inconvenient, and that’s because it will be, so many will just hand it over. It has begun here in Australia with those on social benefit payments, and while it is still a voluntary thing at this point, that will change.
People are also being asked to link their government services as well, like their health record (if they haven’t opted out of that) to their government pension or benefit etc, etc, etc. Which will then give the Home Affairs Minister, or any other government department everything they need to take a really good look at you, even though they have no valid reason to do so.
Which is what makes the plan to introduce a Counter Terrorism (temporary exclusion orders) Bill a bad idea, as it is Step 1 in pushing through legislation to allow this particular minister to sticky-beak on us. Any of us. And how would a counter terrorism bill do that? In another attempt to get the controversial Bill passed, the news has just been conveniently released that 40 jihadists have returned to Australia, it just doesn’t say when they returned and for all we know, they could have done so quite a while ago. So while the Bill, technically speaking, means those who did a midnight flit to go and fight with ISIS and the like have to cool their heels overseas while their intentions to return to Australia are assessed (which would take around two years), what, we have to ask, of the ones already here? Personally, I think if they nicked off overseas to commit atrocities under a terrorist flag, they can just stay there, but some have arrived back home and this is where the Bill has big potential to become Step 1, because the Minister is going to claim the government needs to keep tabs on them, so we need the tech that will allow him to do so on home soil and this will open the door to the government (him actually) getting access to anyone he or his department opts to deem a “threat”. Do you see where this is going now?
Other government ministers can see exactly where he’s going with it and have already guessed what he is really up to (because of that Home Security Bill he has tried to get passed) and to date have refused to support it. With luck they won’t be cajoled into voting with this one, which will grant the green light for this guy to get what he really wants; a technological back door into the lives of any one of us. Not because he needs to, but simply because he wants to be able to and once the technology is there…
Well, there will be no going back, and that’s a worry.