What’s wrong with making our public services more efficient?
If a card cuts form-filling and tackles fraud, our writer says: ‘Bring it on!’
Is the Public Services Card an intrusion into our privacy? Or is it just a practical measure to cut out form-filling and fight fraud? The PSC has been around for more than six years as a social services card and 2.8 million people have been using it without a peep of protest.
Recently, the Department of Social Protection changed the name and started extending the services for which it is needed (see table above).
Most countries in Europe go a lot further and require citizens to carry identity cards at all times. So is the PSC card a step on the way to becoming a police state? Or is it reasonable for the State to pool data about citizens and ask pension or social welfare claimants to prove their identity in this way?
The controversy erupted when an elderly woman’s pension was cut off because she refused to register for the card.
This week, the data protection commissioner rowed into the debate, stating there was a ‘pressing need for updated, clearer and more detailed information to be communicated to the public’ about mandatory use of the card.
Although some people voiced support for the move, they were generally outnumbered by complainants on media platforms such as RTÉ’s Liveline. One man declared he would go to the High Court to fight against it. Others were concerned that their rights were being infringed as many social welfare payments will not be paid without the card.
Politicians then queued up to ‘make hay’ over the issue. Joan Burton – the very woman who brought in the card as minister for social protection – expressed concerns that it could be abused and called for greater legal safeguards.
Incumbent Minister Regina Doherty added to the confusion by saying the card was ‘mandatory’ but not ‘compulsory’!
At least we got some sense on the issue from the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association.
‘If the Public Services Card did not exist, Isme would insist that Minister Doherty immediately introduce one,’ it said.
‘We are particularly troubled by the intervention of the Data Protection Commissioner.
‘Isme supports the commissioner’s call for a comprehensive set of FAQs in relation to the PSC. However, the innocent reader of the commissioner’s press statement on Wednesday might conclude she thought the State guilty of nefarious intent.
‘Privacy is not an absolute right. It has to be balanced against our responsibilities to society, the rights of our neighbours, the rights of taxpayers to ensure their money is honestly spent.’
Even with unemployment falling, our Department of Social Protection is still the biggest spender in the State, forecast to spend €19.9bn this year, out of total Government expenditure of €68.7bn. The Department reported 160 cases of social welfare fraud to the DPP last year. Yet the public alerted it to 20,000 potential cases, suggesting a lot of people are getting away with it.
‘Some 29c in every euro raised in tax in this country is spent on social protection. Taxpayers are entitled to know that this is being spent properly,’ said Isme.
Isme also supports the use of the PSC for passport and driver licence applications.
‘Many employers fear the hire of a driver who may have lost their
licence but has “acquired” a second clean one. Driving licences are also an acceptable form of identification for movement within the Common Travel Area. We need to ensure their issue is properly controlled.’
Isme CEO Neil McDonnell added: ‘I have a PSC, albeit one without a photo. I never considered it an intrusion into my privacy. I had to get it to claim jobseeker’s allowance in 2013.
‘No one other than the Department of Social Protection has asked me to produce it. It’s a good job the gardaí aren’t allowed to ask me for it – I never carry it.’ So who’s right? If having a card saves me from filling out forms, I’m all for it. What’s wrong with making public services more efficient?
I’ve no problem if State departments share very basic information about me – a photograph, name and PPS number. Even soldiers captured in wars don’t begrudge telling the enemy their name, rank and serial number.
Those who are up in arms over privacy and potential fraud issues involving the PSC probably give financial details to all sorts of online traders. We all do; Irish people spend €7bn a year online – and this is expected to double in the next four years. In the first half of 2016 alone, credit card fraud alone cost us €21m – 50% up on the previous year. I would be much more concerned about sharing my credit card details.
What’s a fraudster going to do with my PPS number? Pay tax on my behalf? Claim the dole? Yes, my PPS number – along with a lot of other information – could be used to set up an elaborate identity theft sting operation.
But I think that’s far less likely than the most common forms of fraud that involve bank or credit card details, not PPS numbers.
Many who are outraged about the PSC intruding on their privacy possibly freely exhibit all sorts of data about themselves for the world to see on their Facebook pages.
Government departments sharing my PPS number among themselves is not quite as dangerous.
In fact, I wish State bodies would share more information about me, so I don’t have to, for example, recount my entire medical history from childhood every time I go to a hospital or see a doctor.
Holding information on a card is just a modern alternative to repeatedly filling paper forms.
We already have an increasing range of cards for services. The old E111 form needed filling when you went on holiday to prove EU citizenship. Now it has become a European Health Insurance Card instead and you don’t have to fill out a form every time. Great!
Maybe it was a bit harsh to withhold the aforementioned woman’s pension because she refused to get a card. To encourage people to get cards and defuse the issue, shouldn’t the department just make non-compliers fill out lots of forms instead? The result would be 100% compliance in no time!