Privacy Concerns Continue as Census Night Draws Near

Thursday 4 August 2016 @ 9.45 a.m. | IP & Media | Legal Research

There has been much discussion in the press recently about the 2016 Census which is to be held on the night of Tuesday the 9th of August 2016. The key discussion point being the Australian Bureau of Statistics (the ABS) changed requirements and plans for names and addresses collected as part of the 2016 Census. The ABS now plans to retain names and address information for up to four years [previously it was only retained for 18 months] so as to be able to link this data to other national data.

Privacy Concerns - the Main Objection

The ABS's plans to retain names and addresses longer was announced by the ABS last December and justified by the ABS as providing " . . . a richer and dynamic statistical picture of Australia". Further the ABS argued that keeping names and addresses enabled it to make better combined use of census data with other survey and administrative data. For example, they cited the possibility of matching census data with education or health data in order to help improve support services in those areas.

However, on the down side, privacy advocates have expressed concerns because in the census of previous years Australians have had the ability to "opt in" or chose to have their names and address kept by the ABS. However, for the new census, Australians would be compulsorily required to provide their names and addresses. Further concerns arise when it comes to how the names and addresses will be safeguarded and how the ABS will ensure they cannot be matched to sensitive personal information.

The ABS Response to the Concerns

In a Media Release of last December 2015 the ABS has stated:

"The ABS is committed to the protection of the privacy and confidentiality of everyone who completes the Census. In order to assess this proposed change, the ABS commissioned a full Privacy Impact Assessment in order to identify privacy, confidentiality and security considerations, and assess strategies in place to mitigate any risks."

Some of the measures the ABS has said it will take to ensure it upholds its legal obligation to keep data secure are as follows:

the ABS will remove names and addresses from other personal and household information after data collection and processing
names and addresses are to be stored separately and securely
no one working with the data will be able to view identifying information at the same time as other census information

Further, the ABC Reports that the ABS has also indicated that it would be using "anonymised" versions of names, and that the names and addresses ". . . will only be used for projects approved by a senior-level committee".

The ABS is also reported as indicating it will destroy all names and addresses four years after collection, and ". . . a privacy impact assessment has shown the risk to personal privacy from all of this is very low."

Privacy Concerns not Reduced by ABS Response

The ABC reports however that in the view of Privacy Advocates interviewed by the ABC : ". . . the fact there are any risks at all is . . . unacceptable". Its report quotes Chris Berg from the Institute of Public Affairs on the issue as follows:

"There is no such thing as 100 per cent safely secured information... No matter what firewalls the ABS places around access and matching, it is a truism that any data that can be used usefully can also be used illegitimately."

Similar concerns are also reported from former head of the ABS, Mr Bill McLennan who is reported as saying:

"The compulsory collection and retention of names and addresses is ... very likely to result in a significant public backlash against the 2016 Census with people either boycotting the Census or providing incorrect information. . . . Thousands and thousands of government, business, academic and other users rely on high quality Census data, and a reduction of the accuracy of that data would be a serious issue."

Further, Mr McLennan argued that the ABS had no authority to collect people's names in the Census on a compulsory basis. The ABS says it has legal advice that states otherwise and in its Media Release of last year states:

"The retention of names and addresses collected in the 2016 Census is consistent with the functions of the ABS prescribed in the Australian Bureau of Statistics Act 1975 and compliant with all the provisions in the Census and Statistics Act 1905 and the Privacy Act 1988, including the Australian Privacy Principles."

Australia's former Deputy Privacy Commissioner Mr Nigel Waters recently told the ABC's 7.30 Report:

"What they are now doing is breaking the compact or the deal that they have had with the Australian people for the last 100 years, which is that in exchange for giving them very sensitive information - including about your relationships, your health, your financial circumstances - their part of the deal was to make sure that that information would be de-identified as soon as possible, . . . "

As Well as Privacy Concerns - Logistic and Practical Issues

In recent days, it is reported, that concerns have also been expressed over the change from a paper form to an online process. One issue has been that those still wanting to to do the Census on a paper form have had difficulty attempting to get a paper form because they have been unable to get through to the number provided by the ABS for obtaining a paper form. Another issue has been the prospect of trying to log in on the 9th of August and finding that the ABS site is not accessible because of the number of people trying to use it. Independent Senators Xenophon and Wilkie have both, been reported, to have been critical of the Government on these issues saying the changed process has not been well explained to the public.

In recent days as reported by the ABC even the PM has had to come out and speak in support of the ABS and the 2016 Census and give assurances as to the integrity and privacy of the 2016 Census process, saying:

The organisation [ABS] ". . . always protects people's privacy . . . The security of their personal details is absolute and that is protected by law and by practice, . . . That is a given."

In the Balance

From the above it should be realised the matter of what data is collected needs to be a balance between the protection of people's right to privacy and the collection of much needed valuable research data. It should be considered as The Conversation points out that to date Australia is an exception in not retaining names and addresses as part of Census data:

"Overseas, national statistical agencies have retained names and addresses and linked the census data with other data with much success in terms of data, privacy and public support. Canada, the UK and New Zealand are just a few countries that collect names and addresses and conduct data linkage using the census."

Further the reality of national decision making is that better decisions are made with better information and as The Conversation points out:

"Most would agree that making decisions requiring financial investment should be based on evidence and need. The census provides data to inform such an evidence base. . . . The changes to this year’s census will deliver many improvements for Australians, which will play a powerful role in informing the future."

TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.