The technology exists for government departments to share information about their customers. This could allow departments to function more efficiently, as basic details like address and telephone numbers could automatically be updated across all departments once one department is informed of a change. This could also allow government departments to provide more personalised service.
This may involve the use of a unique identifier each time a customer accesses a government department. Community attitudes towards such an identifier are examined in this section.
Respondents were asked whether they were in favour or against being issued with a unique number to be used for identification purposes and also to access government services on the internet.
While just over half (53%) of respondents were in favour of this concept, (41%) were against the concept. Males were more likely to agree (56%) than females (50%), and respondents on higher household incomes were more likely to agree than those on lower incomes. This question was verified by the CATIBUS, and the results were very similar, as can be seen in Appendix Two.
It has been suggested that each Australian should be given a unique number, like a tax file number, to be used for identification in ALL Commonwealth Government Departments, and to access government services on the Internet. In principle, are you in favour or against each Australian being given such a number?
Respondents were then asked under what circumstances government departments should be allowed to cross reference or share information. The majority of respondents agreed government departments should be able to do this, but only in some circumstances. One in ten respondents (9%) thought this should happen for any purpose, whereas nearly one in four respondents (24%) thought this should not happen under any circumstance.
Males were more likely than females to believe this should happen under any circumstance (11% cf. 8%), and respondents with household incomes below $50,000 were more likely to say information should not be cross referenced at all (27%) than those with household incomes of $50,000-$99,999 (18%) or over $100,000 (17%). Respondents over 50 years (13%) were more likely to believe this should happen under any circumstance than respondents aged 18-24 (4%). Conversely, respondents over 50 were less likely to believe this should happen under some circumstances (56%) than respondents aged 18-24 (65%).
Do you believe government departments should be able to cross-reference or share information in their databases for any purpose, some purposes, or not at all?
Base - 2004 All Respondents n=1,507
Those respondents who answered "some purposes" were given three hypothetical situations (respondents who answered "any purpose" were assumed to agree to all three hypothetical situations).
"To prevent or reduce crime" was the scenario under which more respondents felt it was acceptable to cross reference information. Respondents on higher household incomes were more likely to agree to information being cross referenced for all three purposes.
For which of the following purposes do you believe governments should be allowed to cross reference information? For updating basic information like address details? To solve or prevent fraud or other crime? To reduce costs, or improve efficiency?
Base - 2004 All Respondents n=1,507
^top : Last Updated : 27 October 2004