In 1987, as the leader of the Opposition, John Howard, said: “The assumption of the Australia Card is that every Australian is a cheat - it involves establishing a level of intrusion of a draconian kind into the day-to-day activities of many people”.

In 2006, as leader of our Federal government, John Howard says “The world is very, very different since then and maybe this is one of the things that is needed to be added to our armour”.

Given that we are being told that this is not necessarily “an ID card” and that it won’t be compulsory if you don’t access government services like Medicare, it will have absolutely no use as a defence against terrorism or identity fraud/misidentification (not that ID cards have ever been proven to protect against these things anyway). No, they’ve come out and said that the main effect of this will be to cut down (government services) fraud.

Essentially, Howard seems to be saying that, unlike in 1987, now every Australian is indeed a cheat. Why aren’t we more insulted as a nation?

Big brother database fears aside, what annoys me most about this radical plan from our “conservative” government, is the impact it does have on our ability to make our own adult and legal day-to-day choices and to keep them private.

One of the supposed selling points is that the card will contain your medical and pharmaceutical information. The medical side is being sold as some sort of protection if you are involved in an accident and you’re presumable unconcious so the paramedics know how to treat you. The pharmaceutical side is to protect against the bulk purchasing of pseudoephedrine so that dodgies can’t make up supplies of recreational drugs.

They haven’t been clear on what information will go on the card and how much veto one has over it once it’s been placed there. For either system to work, it requires all your health and purchasing data to be collected. If a paramedic got half your medical history, this could be more dangerous than none and to track illegal drug use effectively, you need to also target those who are buying 1-2 packets but from 10+ stores.

Shouldn’t you have a right to control whether you divulge this information to your health professional? Medical professionals are hardly infallible and we all know experiences of ours or our family/friends where a second opinion has either improved or saved a life. How many people are going to get a second opinion if they know that the new doctor will have access to all previous medical opinions. How much will having that access to that information actually bias and prevent the discovery of an alternative treatment/solution? With the present system, you can choose to control the giving and timing of that information. Maybe you might be worse off for it, but the responsibility for your health is in your hands rather than an often oppressive medical system.

It also makes it difficult for people who like to keep two doctors. For example, people who have a family doctor but may see another doctor for more “embarrassing” problems. I, for one, always have to a have a separated doctor that I don’t know well to do any gynaecological examinations. I don’t really think we should be setting up a system that puts barriers up, if you make it too difficult, people will just procrastinate and those crucial diagnoses just won’t be made.

Of course, because the card is only for those who access the welfare system, if you’re rich enough you can opt out of it. It’s just another way that Australians are no longer equal in Howard’s Australia.
Identity crisis (SMH)

, , , ,