Cameron Whiteley | Mercury Newspaper | October 20, 2020  

Civil libertarians ramp up pressure on government over transfer of 430,000 driver’s licence images

Hundreds of thousands of driver’s licence images have been uploaded to a database which hasn’t been legislated – and despite pushback the government is standing firm on its “baffling” decision.

CIVIL libertarians and petitioners have criticised the state government’s response to a call for the retrieval of hundreds of thousands of images of Tasmanians from a dormant national identity database.

In a response this month to a petition tabled in the Legislative Council, Premier Peter Gutwein failed to commit to trying to get the driver’s
licence images back.

The petition, signed by about 700 Tasmanians, reflected serious privacy concerns about the photos being uploaded to the National Driver
Licence Facial Recognition Solution, which has not yet been ratified by relevant legislation.

More than 430,000 images of Tasmanians were sent to the database in December 2018 in preparation for the rollout of the NDLFRS,
which is aimed to crack down on identity fraud.

But federal legislation on the issue was blocked in October last year by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security,
which said it lacked safeguards to protect people’s right to privacy.

Mr Gutwein, in the government’s response to the Legislative Council, wrote that the ownership and authorisation of access to Tasmanian
images and associated data remained with Tasmania’s Department of State Growth.

The Premier said he understood the federal government was proposing to introduce legislation later this year to support implementation of
face matching services.

“Until this has been passed and I receive advice that Tasmanian legislation fully supports the use for the purpose reflected in this bill,
Tasmanian data that is currently in the segregated partition of the National Driver Licencing Facial Recognition System will not be
available for use by another agency or jurisdiction,’’ Mr Gutwein wrote.

Independent Nelson MLC Meg Webb said the government’s position was out of touch.

“The Gutwein Government’s priority must be the protection of all Tasmanians’ sensitive and personal data,’’ Ms Webb said.

“Rather than instilling confidence, the government’s response to the tabled petition raises further questions, and continues a disturbing
pattern of obfuscation and shirking of responsibility.”

Principal petitioner and Tasmanian director of Civil Liberties Australia, Richard Griggs, referenced the ACT Government’s recent refusal to
hand over images of Territorians to the system until legislation with “rigorous safeguards” was passed.

“As it currently stands, we do not know what privacy protections will be in place and this is unacceptable for such a large and important
tranche of sensitive biometric data of Tasmanians,’’ Mr Griggs said.

“It is essential for Tasmanians to have a say via the state parliament on whether privacy protections are adequate, and if, and under what
conditions, Tasmanians’ sensitive personal data is provided to a national database.”

Mr Gutwein said once the national system was operational, it would use computer programming to generate a code based on distinctive
facial characteristics which he said was unique to each face and could not be mimicked.

“To clarify, it is that code, not the photo, which will be used to confirm an identify or determine attempted fraud or identity theft using
another name,’’ he wrote.

Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Justin Warren said it was “baffling” the state had handed over the data when legislation had not
yet been passed at a federal level.

Mr Warren argued the ACT’s position to the data transfer placed that jurisdiction in a much better position than Tasmania.
“The ACT could insist that their citizens are better protected before any data is handed over, so they’ll probably be better off in the end
than Tasmanians will be,’’ he said.

“I’d be pretty mad about that, if I was a Tasmanian.”