Cash in Society

The Hon. S.L. GAME (16:58): I move:

That this council—

1. Acknowledges that Australians are becoming increasingly worried about the country's move to a cashless society and that the government could weaponise digital money to coerce compliance;

2. Acknowledges the dangers of central bank digital currencies (CBDC), including their significant potential for over-surveillance and control and how they pose a risk to financial privacy and financial freedom; and

3. Recognises the startling trend of businesses and banks restricting access to cash through cash withdrawal restrictions, ATM closures, refusing cash as legal tender, and closing regular branches in favour of 'cashless' branches, and how these actions disproportionately impact our rural communities.

There is a war against cash. We are living in a world where cash is squarely in the crosshairs of regulators, governments and businesses, all at the peril of individuals. Australians are worried about going cashless, as evidenced by a recent report released by payments technology business Waave, which found that 41 per cent of respondents are extremely worried about the idea.

A digital Australia will have serious ramifications for everyone; however, the change will disproportionately hurt our rural communities first, as they are the most reliant on conventional methods of finance. Abolishing cash as a means of monetary exchange necessitates movement to other vehicles. With the federal government's passage of the Digital ID Bill, I fear it is the government's goal to eliminate cash and replace it with central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).

In 2007 cash accounted for 70 per cent of payments in Australia. Fast-forward to 2022, and that figured dwindled to a mere 13 per cent. Let's be clear, this trend is not being driven by consumer demand or organic market shifts; no, it is being propelled by the government and financial institutions.

Australian Tax Office initiatives, like the shadow economy action plan, purportedly aimed at tackling the black market, are stealthily incorporating anti-cash policies. Meanwhile, banks are tightening their grip on cash accessibility. The Commonwealth Bank CEO brazenly called for payments over $500 to be banned, to stifle the shadow economy. Bank branches and ATMs are closing at an alarming rate, with over 700 bank-owned ATMs and 400 branches closing in 2023 alone, as reported by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.

Traditional branches are being closed in favour of cashless branches, leaving many Australians without easy access to cash, and businesses are jumping on the bandwagon, being legally allowed to refuse cash transactions and prioritising digital forms of payment. They are exacerbating the march towards a cashless society. Even the hysteria of COVID-19 has been weaponised to discriminate against cash as a legal tender, further eroding its usage.

It is widely recognised that the transition to a digital economy disproportionately affects rural communities. The severity of the problem led to the creation of a government inquiry, Bank Closures in Regional Australia, which is still ongoing and is scheduled to conclude on 16 May this year. Despite recognising the need for such an inquiry, the trend of bank closures continues unabated, with APRA reporting a staggering decline in branches across Australia, particularly in regional and remote areas. This erosion of physical banking infrastructure further isolates vulnerable communities and accelerates a descent into a cashless abyss.

Cash is not just about coins and notes, it is about giving people the choice, something severely lacking in today's age. Pro-cash movements are not merely fuelled by libertarian ideals, they also recognise the practical benefits of cash as a budgeting tool, a means to decrease fees and the importance of a peer-to-peer monetary vehicle. This becomes all the more clear when considering how one might give money to the homeless. Woe be the day that you cannot give $5 without first obtaining a BSB and account number. Better yet, imagine leaving a receipt rather than a coin under the pillow of your children as evidence of the tooth fairy.

The reality is chilling. The technology underlying CBDCs, called blockchain technology, is being utilised in digital ID systems. This ominous combination heralds a dystopian nightmare reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984. One such instance is a government-run blockchain network called b-Cadastros in Brazil, which is used to authenticate people gaining access to public services online, administer and amend citizen ID cards and register taxes. Digital ID is a prerequisite to digital money, the marriage of which opens up fears concerning excessive government oversight where every aspect of people's lives, from purchasing habits to real-time location, is reported to a centralised entity.

It is not just a privacy concern but the huge opportunity for tyranny that is alarming, where digital currency and digital ID are used to control people's behaviour based on their compliance. One need not look into future plans for examples of financial tyranny. The reality is here and now, as seen in Canada where protesters against COVID-19 mandates were labelled domestic terrorists by their government and subsequently had their bank accounts frozen.

And let's not forget the draconian proposals here at home where the Liberal government in 2019 proposed the Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019, which sought to criminalise cash transactions over $10,000, a bill thwarted by opposition from One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts. These instances serve as a stark reminder of the risks of centralising money in banks beholden to government whims.

Financial freedom hangs in the balance. Economists like John Adams, Chief Economist for As Good As Gold Australia, warned that the purported motives behind cash bans, such as deterring the shadow economy, are a facade for increased control. John notes that the International Monetary Fund (IMF), a global institution with 190 member nations, including Australia, has outlined a plan for handling financial crises called Cashing In: How to Make Negative Interest Rates Work, which involves the use of negative interest rates.

The plan details a scenario in which depositors experience the declining value of their savings in the event that they fall short of depository targets. The availability of cash entirely negates such a plan because it works as an interest rate flaw, as people will choose to hold onto cash when interest rates are zero, and especially when they are negative.

Optimistically, removing cash and replacing it with digital currency may not work out as intended for the government. Research suggests that doing away with cash could promote the use of cryptocurrencies and other digital currencies that are by nature decentralised and thus not controlled by governments or central banks. Though I am not against it, I acknowledge that using cryptocurrencies will present a barrier to entry for those who lack computer proficiency. For this reason I believe peer-to-peer money, like cash, should be accessible to everyone, irrespective of their level of digital literacy.

While some argue for the transition to cashless as a means of security, reality paints a different picture. Despite a decline in physical robbery, cyber crime against individuals in Australia is on the rise, with losses amounting to billions of dollars annually. One Nation asserts that the push for the digitalisation of money, and by extension society, is merely a tactic by the government to exert control over the people. Australians are awakening to the idea that the value of individual freedoms is immeasurable. They understand that, while digitalisation brings about accessibility and convenience, they are not willing to compromise their fundamental freedoms for them.

Honourable members, the dangers of a cashless society loom large. It is not merely a matter of convenience, it is about preserving fundamental freedoms and ensuring equitable access to financial services for all Australians. The time to act is now, before we find ourselves ensnared in a digital dystopia of our own making.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.