MINISTERIAL BRIEFING NOTE
Subject
Options for a Digital Driver Licence
Date
29 August 2024
1982
Briefing number
BRI-3111
ACT
Contact(s) for telephone discussion (if required)
Name
Position
Direct line
Cel phone
1st contact
Liz Maguire
Chief Digital Officer
s 9(2)(a)
Richard Forgan
Group General
s 9(2)(a)
Manager - System
Leadership
INFORMATION
Action taken by Office of the Minister
Noted
OFFICIAL
Seen by Minister
Agreed
THE
Feedback provided
Forwarded to
Needs change [please specify]
UNDER
Withdrawn
Overtaken by events
RELEASED
BRI-3111
29 August 2024
Hon Simeon Brown – Minister of Transport
OPTIONS FOR A DIGITAL DRIVER LICENCE
1982
Purpose
ACT
1. This briefing advises you on options to deliver a digital driver licence (DDL) as quickly as
possible at minimum cost. This includes the legislative amendments required, potential legislative
vehicles and funding considerations to progress the required changes.
Background
2. On 14 August 2024, the Ministry of Transport and NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) briefed you and
Hon Judith Col ins as Minister for Digitising Government, on the status of work to progress a DDL
(refer OC240950 / BRI-3134).
3. We understand your objective is to provide a simple DDL solution that would serve as an
INFORMATION
alternative to the physical card that can be stored and accessed on digital devices (including in a
digital wal et) and have the same legal status as the physical version.
4. NZTA can quickly deploy a digital wal et offering through the NZTA App. Other common wal ets
are developed by mobile device original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) s 9(2)(b)(ii)
OFFICIAL
5. A well-designed DDL can be used in person or online, be issued remotely, and provide real-time
updates to licence status, endorsements, and control of personal information. The use of
encryption and other security measures reduce the risk of fraud or identity theft compared to the
THE
physical version.
6. Queensland's experience reveals that their state-issued driver licence is used 50 times more
often as an identity document rather than for proving driving qualifications. Our early cost
indication of approximately $50 mil ion was based on the Queensland experience. Further
investigation since our meeting with you indicates that this funding was for a larger five-year
UNDER
service modernisation programme, and the DDL formed part of this wider programme.
Options to deliver a Digital Driver Licence
7. NZTA, the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) and the Ministry of Transport (MoT) have
investigated options to deliver a DDL and considered the advantages and disadvantages of
each. A summary of our assessment of these options is outlined below (a more detailed
assessment is presented in Appendix 1).
RELEASED
Option 1: A facsimile of the physical driver licence included in the NZTA App
8. The quickest option to deliver a DDL is for a facsimile of the physical driver licence, including the
licence holder’s photo, to be included in the NZTA App.
Page 2
BRI-3111
9. A simple facsimile DDL is unlikely to be integrated with OEM digital wallets. s 9(2)(b)(ii)
10. This option could not be accredited under the Digital Identity Services Trust Framework as it
would not adhere to the minimal requirements for “secure and trusted” services. An approved
verifier app would add a basic layer of security.
11. This option would be significantly less secure than the existing physical version, making it easier
1982
to counterfeit and more susceptible to fraud. This would likely lead to an increase in fraudulent
activity and identity theft, eroding trust in digital identity services and posing a reputational risk for
the New Zealand Government. This option does not deliver any of the wider benefits of DDLs
ACT
including online use, Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance, use in a range of digital wallets,
or future cross-jurisdiction interoperability.
12. Other jurisdictions that have implemented a facsimile option have over time rebuilt the facsimile
DDL to a recognised standard, and this option then becomes redundant (Queensland and New
South Wales). The lesson learnt shared by Queensland and New South Wales from their
experience in undertaking Option 1 is to not do this. Option 1 cannot be built on. Both
jurisdictions have had to start again with Options 2 or 3.
13. NZTA and DIA do not recommend this option. The whole-of-life cost of a bespoke solution
INFORMATION
(Option 1) that wil need to be maintained, upgraded, and ultimately replaced wil be more
expensive than building to a recognised standard.
Option 2: A digital driver licence built to the recognised standard (NZTA recommendation)
14. Developing a DDL that aligns to a recognised standard ensures the solution wil be secure and
trusted. This approach allows the digital licence to be compatible with existing technologies, such
OFFICIAL
as digital wallets and verifier apps, and enables NZTA and other stakeholders to engage with
solution providers who have developed complying products, including those who offer off-the-
shelf solutions.
THE
15. This option aligns with the Digital Identity Services Trust Framework and wil al ow NZTA to seek
accreditation under the framework. This wil allow for wide adoption and help develop trust in
government digital identity services in New Zealand. Initial uptake would require the use of
identity strength credentials such as RealMe Verified or DIA’s Identity Check.
UNDER
16. It enables the wider benefits of a DDL including secure online use, enhanced privacy by allowing
individuals to share only specific pieces of information or to generate new information based on
existing data (for instance that they are over a certain age without revealing their date of birth),
the potential for cross-jurisdiction interoperability, and ease of issuance and reissuance.
17. Several solution providers already have a product built to recognised standards. NZTA could limit
procurement activity to vendors with a successful track record who can demonstrate a working
product. Delivering this option is likely to involve a vendor partnership and ongoing software
RELEASED
licensing costs (included in the cost estimate over 5 years).
18. It would allow third party businesses to choose verification software suppliers. Apple have
recently announced a verifier capability they are building for their next version of the Apple
operating system, so smaller businesses can access it for free.
Page 3
BRI-3111
Option 3: A digital driver licence built to be an identity strength credential (DIA
recommendation)
19. The key difference compared to Option 2 is this would provide a strong identification document
that can be used as standalone proof of identity.
20. A limitation with the current physical driver licence process is that when a person obtains or
renews their driver licence, their identification is accepted at ‘face value’ by NZTA agents and
1982
may include documents that do not contain a photo. This means a driver licence is robust proof
that the person holding it can drive but is not a robust identity document.
ACT
21. This option requires upgrading NZTA’s processes (and the wider driver licensing agent system)
to al ow for the creation of a digital driver licence that has the equivalent strength of a passport as
an identification document. This would require multiple changes within NZTA and with partners,
including DIA.
22. The updated process would mean the DDL was acceptable in a wider range of applications,
including for ful AML compliance. The trade-off is the additional cost and time required to
upgrade NZTA and agent systems and processes. This option would require DIA to incur costs of
approximately s 9(2)(g)(i) to put in place the checks and assurance for an identity strength
credential.
INFORMATION
23. This approach would require NZTA to operate a dual system as driver licences are upgraded to
the identity strength credential over the 10-year licence renewal period.
24. An additional advantage is both licence forms (digital and physical) would become an identity
strength credential. This option can be delivered as a future improvement that builds on Option
2.
Option 4: Third parties issue digital driver licences
OFFICIAL
25. Consideration has been given to whether a third party could be the issuing agent for a DDL. By
THE
giving approved third parties access to driver licence data, and enabling them to issue DDLs, the
government could have the cost of the design, build and deployment met by the agent.
26. Third parties would be required to issue a DDL in the recognised standard to ensure the
useability and functionality of the DDL would be the same as if NZTA issued it under Option 2.
Each third party would be required to seek accreditation under the Digital Identity Services Trust
UNDER
Framework.
27. Work would need to be undertaken to develop a private public partnership model that provided a
sufficient incentive for third parties to take on the upfront cost of development and deployment.
This may include allowing the third party to charge drivers a fee for the issuance of a DDL and
the possible bundling of other services.
28. NZTA would need to develop processes to monitor third party performance, including ongoing
RELEASED
levels of service, security, and privacy. At this stage, the potential business model, delivery
timeframe and costs of this option are too uncertain for us to recommend this as a viable option.
Page 4
BRI-3111
Summary of Options 1 to 4
29. A summary of the functions and features of each proposed option are in the following table:
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Facsimile Copy in A DDL built to the A DDL built to be an Third parties issue
the NZTA App recognised standard identity strength
DDL
compatible with
credential
1982
digital wallets
compatible with
digital wallets
NZTA
DIA
Recommended
Recommended
ACT
Indicative Cost
s 9(2)(g)(i)
s 9(2)(g)(i)
s 9(2)(g)(i)
TBC
Range
Including basic
Including costs and Including NZTA and
security features maintenance over 5
DIA costs and
(i.e. QR scanning to
years
maintenance over 5
verify the licence),
years
costs and
maintenance over 5
Excludes costs to make
years
changes to third party
systems (if agents are a
DDL point of issuance)
and ongoing costs of
enhanced NZTA
regulatory integrity
processes
INFORMATION
Timeframe
6 months to pilot 12 months to pilot
24+ months
TBC
Min viable DDL
✓
✓
✓
✓
Secure
Minimal
✓
✓
✓
Privacy-
enhancing
x
✓
✓
✓
OFFICIAL
Digital Identity
Services Trust
Framework
x
✓
✓
✓
THE
Accreditable
Online Use
x
✓
✓
✓
Passport-Strength
ID
x
x
✓
Possible
UNDER
Partially
AML Compliant
x
(no change from
✓
Possible
current system)
Enables Open
Banking
x
✓
✓
✓
Use in existing
digital wallets
x
✓
✓
✓
RELEASED
International
Interoperability
x
✓
✓
✓
Page 5
BRI-3111
NZTA’s recommended option
30. NZTA recommends Option 2 since this wil deliver an effective and functional DDL as quickly as
possible at minimum cost. A DDL built to a recognised standard would align with the direction
taken in multiple jurisdictions (including Australia) and can be ready to pilot in 12 months once
funding is secured. Option 2 also provides a foundation for the development of an identity
strength credential (i.e. Option 3) if this is desired in the future.
1982
Funding
31. Funding choices wil vary depending on your preferred option. Please note delivery of your ACT
preferred option is dependent on NZTA securing a funding source. The Driver Licensing
Memorandum account is in deficit. Our early assessment is that user pays/cost recovery is likely
to be the most appropriate solution.
32. s 9(2)(g)(i)
This may provide sufficient funding
over ten years to cover the costs of delivering Option 2. A repayable Crown grant could be
explored as a mechanism to enable delivery.
33. Further investigation of funding options and ongoing costs is required. We wil provide further
advice, including potentially through the November report back on options to reduce cost under-
INFORMATION
recovery.
Legislation
34. To enable implementation of a DDL, amendments are required to the Land Transport Act 1998
and Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999. Specific amendments are set out in Appendix
2.
OFFICIAL
35. MoT has investigated legislative vehicle options. One option is to progress amendments via the
Statutes Amendment Bil 2023 (the Bill). We note it may be chal enging for the amendments to fit
THE
within the criteria and timeframe for this Bil . If this option is chosen, MoT can provide a letter to
the Associate Minister of Justice seeking support for the changes to be included while the Bill is
at Select Committee.
36. Alternatively, the transport legislation modernisation package should provide a series of
legislative vehicles. You could seek priority to bring forward a specific bil to support the changes
UNDER
as part of the Legislation Programme 2024-2026. Enactment in the year 2025 could be sought in
the bid for the Bil .
37. MoT is not aware of any other bil on the legislative programme to be progressed by other
departments that would be suitable for the proposed amendments. Progressing a specific bill as
part of the 2025 Legislation Programme is preferred.
38. Further legal advice and a privacy impact assessment wil be needed for the DDL to be stored in
RELEASED
OEM wallets. This advice wil depend on your preferred option and the specific terms and
conditions of each OEM wal et.
Page 6
BRI-3111
Next steps
39. Once we have received direction on the preferred option and a funding source is confirmed,
NZTA can commence procurement activity for the technical solution with known solution
providers. MoT wil provide you with further advice on legislative options, Cabinet timeframes and
key milestones.
40. We understand your office wil forward this briefing to Hon Judith Col ins as Minister for Digitising
1982
Government and that DIA may provide her further advice on DDLs as part of the wider digital
credential ecosystem.
ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
Page 7
BRI-3111
It is recommended that you:
1.
Agree to progress a preferred option:
a. Option 1
A facsimile of the physical driver licence via the NZTA App
Yes / No
b. Option 2 A DDL built to the recognised standard (NZTA Recommendation)
Yes / No
1982
c. Option 3 A DDL built to be an identity strength credential (DIA
Yes / No
recommendation)
Yes / No
d. Option 4 Third parties issue DDLs
ACT
2.
Agree to proceed with DDL related amendments via:
a. 2025 Transport Legislative Programme (preferred)
Yes / No
b.
Statutes Amendment Bil 2023
Yes / No
3.
Agree to the development of a Cabinet paper (by the Ministry of Transport)
Yes / No
4.
Forward this briefing to Hon Judith Collins, Minister for Digitising Government
Yes / No
INFORMATION
5.
Note that the Ministry of Transport wil work with you on the legislative next steps
and the timing of the Cabinet paper
OFFICIAL
THE
...........................................................................
Richard Forgan
Group General Manager – System Leadership
UNDER
RELEASED
............................................................................
Hon Simeon Brown, Minister of Transport Date:
2024
Page 8
BRI-3111
Appendix 1 Delivery Options
Option
Pros
Cons
Cost and Timeframe
DIA Comment
Option 1
• Easy access through the NZTA App.
• Likely to increase fraudulent activity and instances of Estimated cost range: s 9(2)(g)(i) for It would have limited utility given the
• Automatically delivered to NZTA App users who have
identity theft.
an in-built NZTA App DDL with basic inability to be used in most contexts,
A facsimile of the physical driver
enrolled with RealMe Verified.
• Fraudsters could replicate a digital facsimile easier
security features (i.e. QR scanning to lack of interoperability with existing
licence (including the licence
• Quickest to deliver as it requires limited vendor support
than a physical one.
verify the licence). This range
platforms and services, and would
holder’s photo) which resides
(i.e. NZTA can build in house).
• Third parties could be easily shown a fraudulent copy. includes costs over 5 years, including create significant reputational risk
within the NZTA App.
• Some security features could be built to mitigate fraud
• Unlikely to be accepted outside of New Zealand or
maintenance.
and increase mistrust in digital
1982
and identity theft (e.g. animation, hologram, refresh
have any interoperability benefit.
identity services.
Digital Identity Services Trust
request, QR code verification).
• Not accreditable under the Digital Identity Services
Time to pilot: 6 months (in the NZTA
Framework Accredited: No
• Can be updated remotely and in real time, reducing
Trust Framework.
App wallet only).
ACT
cost and improving efficiency. As the DDL can be
• Cannot be used online.
updated in real time it could help circumvent potential
• Creates a reputational risk if we issue a credential that
data breaches.
does not provide adequate trust and confidence to
New Zealanders.
• Third parties may not accept the digital licence
version, requiring a licence holder to also carry their
physical licence. It could also create confusion around
what a DDL can be used for.
• If there is low acceptance and trust this may impact
overall adoption of this option and any subsequent
DDL solutions (even if we eventual y standardise and
become accredited under the Digital Identity Services
Trust Framework).
INFORMATION
• Privacy risks, as is the case with the physical licence
remain, i.e. the customer cannot control what
information on their driver licence is shared with a third
party.
• Lessons learnt from other jurisdictions in Australia
have demonstrated that a facsimile option has not met
the objective of replacing the physical driver licence. In
December 2023 Queensland replaced its piloted
OFFICIAL
facsimile DDL and New South Wales is currently
building a replacement for their facsimile DDL.
Option 2 (NZTA
• Easy access via the NZTA App and digital wal ets.
• Trust is assumed by the standard being met.
Estimated cost range: s 9(2)(g)(i) . The identification management and
recommended)
• Aligned with Australia and can share resources and
• Initia
THE l uptake wil be limited to the use of other assured This range includes costs over 5 therefore strength of the DDL as an
technology potentially saving costs.
identity credentials e.g. RealMe Verified (or a similar years, including maintenance.
identification document could be
A DDL built to a recognised
• Digital Identity Services Trust Framework accreditation
strength credential) to obtain accreditation.
improved over time.
standard.
enables a high adoption pathway.
• Currently, identity documentation presented by driver Time to pilot: 12 months.
• NZTA can partner with solution providers who have
licence applicants, to obtain or renew a driver licence,
Driver licences are used ubiquitously
Digital Identity Services Trust
built this solution and can learn from prior
is unilateral y accepted at ‘face value’ by NZTA
in transactions to access other
Framework Accredited: Yes
experiences.
agents. In Option 2 combining the licence with RealMe
identity services, NZTA should be
UNDER
• Usability is being widely tested and we can leverage
Verified wil give the DDL the assurance level required
encouraged to work with DIA to
learnings from other jurisdictions.
to be a form of identity. Option 3 wil do the same for
develop a more robust identity
• Can be used online.
DDL and physical licence holders.
proofing solution to ensure the
• Increased privacy for DDL holders over a physical
• This option would have limited use in AML compliance
credential issued is of a high
version. The customer who holds the DDL is in control
(it would stil require additional proof). This is no
strength.
of what personal information is shared with third parties
change from the current system.
(e.g., a customer shares only the fact they are older
• This lower-level strength would put us out of alignment
than 18 rather than their ful name and date of birth).
with Australia making future interoperability more
• A third party can decide to receive only an answer to a
difficult.
RELEASED
question (e.g. is the person over 18) as a verification or
only the personal information required for a particular
transaction, thus reducing the risk of impinging a driver
licence holder’s privacy.
• DDLs built to a recognised standard can be used in
any scenario where identity needs to be verified – for
BRI-3111
example, for law enforcement purposes, in airports,
banks, hotels, retailers and more.
• Private sector is empowered to build and manage
verifiers - early engagement with these suppliers would
mean the ecosystem is ready to receive the DDL in a
vast number of use cases.
• With a high level of assurance in the customers
identity, the ability to update photograph and
appropriate personal information does not create a
knock-on cost (i.e. print).
1982
Option 3 (DIA Recommended)
Al the benefits of Option 2
• Requires a driver licensing system uplift. Multiple
Estimated cost range: s 9(2)(g)(i)
While this would produce a stronger
• Al Driver Licence holders wil automatically have a
changes wil be required within NZTA, as wel as
(NZTA), s 9(2)(g) (DIA).
credential, the trade-off is in the
A DDL built to a recognised
highly trusted identity credential (passport-strength for
partners.
This range i
(i) ncludes costs over 5
additional time and cost required to
standard and is also an identity
both physical and digital options).
• It may put a higher burden of proof and cost on
years, including maintenance.
get to a pilot.
ACT
strength credential.
• Widely useable for AML compliance (no additional
applicants applying or reapplying for a driver licence,
proof required) and other identification processes
but this can be eased using DIA’s Identity Check and Time to pilot: 24 months +.
It would also enable the expansion of
Improvements to NZTA’s
requiring a high degree of trust.
other relevant services.
Identity Check.
identity management
• Requires additional investment in Identity Check.
processes.
• For a period, NZTA wil be operating a dual system (as
The information we received from
driver licences wil be upgraded to the identity strength
NZTA previously is this option would
Digital Identity Services Trust
credential over the 10-year renewal cycle).
take 24 months including
Framework Accredited: Yes
accreditation and a pilot.
Option 4
Most of the benefits of Option 2
• Dependent on third parties being wil ing and able to Cost: TBC
This option would reflect the position
act as authorised partners. Currently there is no
Timeframe: TBC
that Government should focus on its
Driver licence data is shared to
• The cost of the design, build and deployment of the
certainty these third parties would be interested.
role as a “wholesaler” of information
INFORMATION
a third parties who issues the
DDL credential is met by the authorised service
• The financial model for third parties would need to be This option would require further
and leave the retailing to third
DDL as an authorised partner.
providers.
developed to ensure it was sustainable.
investigation with the private sector to parties.
• An opportunity for public private partnerships between
• Requires ongoing costs to NZTA to monitor the
confirm timeframe and costs.
government and trusted private sector organisations
service provider’s security posture.
Third parties creating DDLs could
Digital Identity Services Trust
(for instance, banks or telecommunications).
• Regular assessments wil need to be undertaken to
expand into creating other
Framework Accredited: Each
• May increase trust in digital identity services given
evaluate security and privacy risks, including
credentials based on other sources
offering would need to obtain its
customers have strong existing relationships with these
monitoring, and evaluating security assurance of the
(DIA, Immigration NZ for instance).
own accreditation.
third parties (for instance, their bank).
providers.
OFFICIAL
• This model is already used by NZTA with driver
• Cost may need to be recovered over and above the
licensing agents like AA and VTNZ.
existing licence cost to make the business model
attractive.
• Lack of trust in a credential that may vary in look and
THE
feel (if delivered by multiple parties). May be a barrier
to related NZTA service delivery improvements such
as digital WoF/CoF, etc.
UNDER
RELEASED
Page 10
BRI-3111
Appendix 2
Land Transport Act 1998 amendments required to implement a DDL
Amendment
Section
Reason
Amend the definition of a Driver Licence to include a DDL
Section 2
The Driver Licence as a means of identification for both transport and non-transport purposes has been enabled in 32
pieces of legislation.
It is referred to in the Credit Reporting Privacy Code and the
Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of
Terrorism Act 2009.
1982
Amending the definition of a Driver Licence to include a DDL wil avoid amending additional legislation to also refer to a
DDL.
Give the Director the ability to set out how a Driver Licence holder
Instead of inserting clause in DL Rule Clarify that a licence holder f that a licence holder is not required to hand over their device to a third party.
ACT
produces a DDL to a third party
could be included under section 5
Give the Director the ability to set out how a Driver Licence holder
Section 5(4)
Clarify that a licence holder is not required to hand over their device to an enforcement office.
produces a physical Driver Licence and DDL whenever required to do so
by an enforcement officer
Accommodate the form of a DDL
Section 28
Ensure the DDL reflects the same key information that must be on the physical card e.g. name, date of birth.
State that a Driver Licence can only have such other features as the
Section 28(3)
Enable flexibility for other features to be added to a DDL.
Director specifies in writing
Refer to surrendering a physical Driver Licence and not a DLL, for
Sections 19(2), 19(3), 30, 31(1)(d),
If a licence holder has their licence suspended or revoked there is a requirement for the licence holder to deliver their
example when their Driver Licence has been revoked
95(2)(c), 105(8) and 105(8A)
driver licence to NZTA. Clarify that this requirement only applies to a physical driver licence.
Record whether someone holds a DDL on the DLR
Section 199
Useful to have a record in the Driver Licence Register of who holds each type of driver licence.
Record whether someone holds a physical Driver Licence on the DLR
Section 199
Useful to have a record in the Driver Licence Register of who holds each type of driver licence.
INFORMATION
Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999 amendments required to implement a DDL
Amendment
Section
Reason
Enable the Director to set out the features to verify and protect the
Clause 62
There are physical features that the driver licence card must have, e.g., particular licences must be a specific colour.
integrity of a DDL. Set out the features to verify and protect a physical
Specify the characteristics that wil apply to a DDL.
Driver Licence
OFFICIAL
Enable the Director to set out the form of a DDL. Set out the form of a
Clause 63
There is specific information that the driver licence card must have. Specify what information must be displayed on a
physical Driver Licence
DDL and what information must be displayed only to a physical driver licence.
Require a DDL to comply with the requirements of the ISO 18013-5
Clause 63
Requiring the DDL to comply with the requirements of the ISO 18013-5 standard wil enable businesses, government
THE
standard
agencies, and other entities that verify driver licences to quickly and with high confidence validate the DDL. This
standard wil give the holder control of their ID data on their mobile device.
Make it clear that requirements to surrender or deliver a Driver Licence to Clauses 74, 75, 76, 79(1)(b), 85(b),
If a licence holder has their licence suspended or revoked there is a requirement for them to deliver to it to the agency.
Waka Kotahi only apply to the physical card
89(g)
Clarify that this requirement only applies to a physical driver licence.
UNDER
RELEASED
Page 11
Document Outline
