Craig Kelly: Australian Digital ID

SUMMARY:
------------------------------
I'm excited to share this talk on the Australian Digital ID — a topic that affects every Aussie who cares about privacy, freedom and common sense. I kick off with a cheeky anecdote about being briefly banned from Facebook while testing a fake account, so you know this isn't just theory but lived experience. The heart of the talk is a walk-through of how the Digital ID bill was pushed through federal parliament: sneaked into the Senate first, bypassing the usual scrutiny the Senate is supposed to provide as a house of review. I explain why that back-door approach should set off alarm bells and why the usual parliamentary process matters. This isn't an anti-tech rant — I acknowledge there are benefits to digital ID — but I argue the risks (centralised data, government control, threats to civil liberties and weak oversight) far outweigh the claimed gains. If you care about who controls data about you, and the kind of society we want, watch the full talk, share your thoughts and join the conversation about protecting our rights before systems are rolled out without proper debate.

RUMBLE DESCRIPTION:
-----------------------------------
Thanks for tuning in — in this clip I unpack why the Australian Digital ID is not just another piece of IT policy, but a fundamental question about how we want our society to be governed. I open with a light story about being briefly banned from Facebook while testing a phony account — a small example of how big tech and data rules can affect everyday life. Then I dive straight into the parliamentary process: how the Digital ID bill was quietly started in the Senate, effectively sidestepping the traditional review mechanisms the Senate is meant to provide. That back-door move matters. The Senate should be the house of review, not a rubber stamp.

I talk through the claimed benefits of a digital ID and why, on paper, some of them sound attractive. But I also set out the risks — centralised databases, the potential for government overreach, increased surveillance, weak protections for individual rights and limited transparency about how data will be used or shared. This is about whether we let systems record and mark us for life without robust debate and safeguards.

This video is for anyone who wants a clear, plain-English explanation of the issue and wants to think critically about trade-offs. I’m not anti-technology; I’m pro-responsibility, pro-transparency and pro-our liberties. If you found this useful, please like, share, comment your thoughts and subscribe for more discussions on public policy, privacy and civic rights. Let’s make sure decisions like this are debated properly — not sneaked through the back door.

⚠️ CONTENT DISCLAIMER ⚠️
The views, opinions, and statements expressed in this video are those of the individual speaker(s) and audience members. They do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or positions of Western Heritage Australia or its affiliates.

This content is presented for educational and informational purposes as well as to facilitate public discourse on important social and political issues. We provide a platform for diverse Australian voices to be heard, to assist the public in forming their own informed opinions.

Western Heritage Australia does not endorse, verify, or take responsibility for the accuracy of statements made by speakers. All claims, statistics, and opinions remain the responsibility of the original speaker. Viewers are encouraged to conduct their own research and consult multiple sources when forming opinions on these topics.

This video may contain strong political opinions, controversial viewpoints, strong language, or mature themes. Viewer discretion is advised.