Open-source government: why public software should be publicly owned

Every time you interact with government - filing a tax return, applying for a Medicare rebate, or registering to vote - you're using software that your tax dollars helped build, but that you'll never truly own. It's time we changed that.

The hidden cost of proprietary government software

Australian governments at all levels spend an estimated $12 billion annually on information technology, with software licensing making up a substantial portion of this expenditure. The Department of Human Services alone has spent over $2.8 billion on IT contracts since 2020, much of it on proprietary systems that lock taxpayers into ongoing licensing fees and vendor dependency.

When government agencies commission custom software from private companies, the intellectual property typically remains with the contractor. This means:

• We pay twice: Once to build it, then again for licensing and maintenance
• No sharing between agencies: Each department often rebuilds similar systems from scratch
• Vendor lock-in: Switching providers becomes prohibitively expensive
• Limited transparency: Proprietary code can't be audited by the public or security researchers

Consider the Australian Taxation Office's systems. While specific figures aren't publicly available (itself a transparency problem), similar tax systems overseas have cost hundreds of millions to develop. Yet the ATO can't share this software with state revenue offices, and taxpayers have no visibility into how their personal data is processed.

The open-source alternative

Open-source software offers a fundamentally different model. When government code is open-source:

• Anyone can inspect it for security vulnerabilities or privacy issues
• Improvements benefit everyone - fixes and features developed by one agency can be shared
• No vendor lock-in - multiple companies can compete to provide support and enhancements
• Long-term cost savings - no ongoing licensing fees for software already paid for by taxpayers

This isn't theoretical. Estonia has saved millions by building its digital government infrastructure on open-source foundations. Their e-Residency program and digital voting systems are built on code that any country can adapt and improve.

Closer to home, the New Zealand government has adopted an "open source first" policy, requiring agencies to consider open-source options before proprietary alternatives. They've found significant cost savings and improved collaboration between departments.

Australian success stories (and missed opportunities)

Australia has some positive examples. The Australian Digital Transformation Agency has released several open-source projects, including the Design System that helps agencies build consistent, accessible websites. This approach has prevented dozens of agencies from rebuilding the same basic components.

The Australian Electoral Commission's election night results system is another success story - built in-house and designed for transparency and auditability.

However, these remain exceptions. Major systems like the myGov platform, Centrelink's payment systems, and state government databases remain locked in proprietary silos. The recent troubles with the COVIDSafe app highlighted how closed development processes can lead to privacy concerns and technical issues that might have been caught earlier with open development.

Security through transparency

A common objection to open-source government software is security: "Won't publishing the code help hackers?" This misunderstands how modern cybersecurity works.

Security through obscurity is no security at all. Professional attackers already have sophisticated tools to reverse-engineer systems. Meanwhile, publishing code allows thousands of security researchers to identify and fix vulnerabilities.

The most secure software in the world - from Linux servers to encryption protocols - is open source. Government systems would be more secure, not less, if they followed the same model.

Why direct democracy matters for digital policy

This issue perfectly illustrates why Australians need more say in how their government operates. Current procurement decisions are made by bureaucrats and politicians with little technical expertise, often influenced by persuasive sales teams from big tech companies.

In a true democracy, citizens should have a voice in fundamental decisions about:

• Digital rights and privacy: How should government handle your personal data?
• Technology procurement: Should we prioritise local capability or international vendors?
• Transparency standards: What government code should be open for public inspection?
• Long-term digital strategy: How do we build systems that serve citizens, not vendors?

These aren't just technical decisions - they're choices about what kind of democracy we want to live in. When software shapes how citizens interact with their government, citizens should shape how that software is built.

A mandate for change

Imagine if every major government IT project had to pass a simple test: "Is this in the long-term interests of Australian taxpayers?" Open-source requirements would often win on both economic and democratic grounds.

The path forward requires policies that:

• Mandate open-source development for new government software
• Require public code audits for systems handling citizen data
• Create shared repositories where agencies can collaborate on common needs
• Build local technical capability instead of relying on offshore vendors

But first, we need a government that actually listens to its citizens on these crucial decisions.

Ready to have your say on digital democracy? Take our policy quiz to see how your views align with other Australians on technology, transparency, and government accountability - then help us build a platform where your voice actually matters.