F61
The Census
August 06 2016
Comments
-
DynamicCouple36
8 years ago
It seemed to just want to know where one has lived over the past 5 years and what ones income is .... We were concerned about giving out our residential address and the fact that they can disclose these details after a period of time ... We wonder what the real reason behind the census is - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I noted that unlike some other forms I have seen, it still has only female & male as gender options. I have at least seen "other" on different forms. Maybe they should just ask for chromosome type?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I'd given up on expecting this thread to arrive. Thank you RHP. :-) I agree with you DynamicCouple. In a time where cyber insecurity is rife, I question the whole procedure, the info they want us to supply under threat of fines and the length of time they want to keep our info for. I didn't think I was living in a police state. Peachy
-
RHP User
8 years ago
The Census has been conducted since early last century under the auspices of the Census and Statistics Act 1905. As seems the case with all Legislation/Law Acts, there is some ambiguity. You need to look to other documents/instruments for clarification. Following is a copy/paste extract of the relevant Law Act: "Part III—Statistics 9 Statistical information to be collected (1) The Statistician: (a) may from time to time collect such statistical information in relation to the matters prescribed for the purposes of this section as he or she considers appropriate; and (b) shall, if the Minister so directs by notice in writing, collect such statistical information in relation to the matters so prescribed as is specified in the notice. (2) The Statistician shall collect such statistical information as is necessary for the purposes of the compilation and analysis, under section 12, of statistics of the number of the people of each State as on the last day of March, June, September and December in each year, but nothing in this subsection shall be taken to limit the generality of subsection (1)." "12 Publication etc. of statistics (1) The Statistician shall compile and analyse the statistical information collected under this Act and shall publish and disseminate the results of any such compilation and analysis, or abstracts of those results. (2) The results or abstracts referred to in subsection (1) shall not be published or disseminated in a manner that is likely to enable the identification of a particular person or organization. (3) The Statistician may make charges for results and abstracts published and disseminated under this section." Elsewhere, it is stated the ABS (operating under the Australian Bureau of Statistics Act 1975) gathers data necessary for the Australian Government to properly plan and manage administration of programs and services to the population (such as Health, Education, Aged Care, Infrastructure, etc etc). As has been pointed out, the 2016 Census is mired in controversy due to some highly significant changes which have been introduced for this year's data collection. Senator Nick Xenophon has some material on his website which is worth a read (as a useful starting point). Coincidentally, he quotes the author of a book I read recently (and which I noted in the "Books that changed us..." thread) which specifically addresses issues of Privacy Law. There have been serious concerns expressed by authoritative figures in the fields of Privacy, Security/Cybersecurity, and the ABS. Aside from the question whether adequate safeguards are in place to ensure the security of sensitive data*, it is questionable as to whether it is actually reasonably necessary for the ABS to collect all of the data sought in this Census; particularly personally identifiable data such as the names of individuals living in specific households. The Government had sought to collect this additional personal data in 2005, but was stymied by a commissioned independent report which recommended against. The Government subsequently commissioned the ABS to study the matter. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the ABS report recommended in favour. I'll be reading more relevant material tonight and I will look forward with interest to learn the views of other forumites in the next 24 hours... *Amongst these security concerns is a suggestion that a private firm may be (or has been?) engaged to handle this data, and that this firm is not subject to the same security standards as the ABS itself.
-
troggie
8 years ago
hi unimpeachable I spoke to some people about the fine there is no fine for not failing to fill out the census
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Quoting 'troggie' hi unimpeachable I spoke to some people about the fine there is no fine for not failing to fill out the census Excerpt of Census and Statistics Act 1905: Note: Currently the fine is $180 per penalty unit. "14 Failure to answer questions etc. (1) A person commits an offence if: (a) the person is served a direction under subsection 10(4) or 11(2); and (b) the person fails to comply with the direction. Penalty: One penalty unit. (2) Subsection (1) is an offence of strict liability. Note 1: For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code. Note 2: A person commits an offence in respect of each day until the person complies with the direction (see section 4K of the Crimes Act 1914). (3) Subsection (1) does not apply in relation to a person’s failure to answer a question, or to supply particulars, relating to the person’s religious beliefs. Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection (3) (see subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code). 15 False or misleading statements or information A person commits an offence if: (a) the person: (i) is required, requested or directed to fill up and supply particulars under subsection 10(2), (3) or (4); or (ii) is requested or directed to answer a question under subsection 11(1) or (2); and (b) the person makes a statement, either orally or in writing, or provides a document containing information, in connection with the requirement, request or direction; and (c) the person knows that the statement or information is false or misleading in a material particular. Penalty: 10 penalty units." Basically, if you're feeling recalcitrant, failure to answer is far cheaper than to give false answers, but it will still break your bank!
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Took 5 minutes - click, next, click and your done. If your not behind bars already, your towing the line . Much ado about nothing really!
-
inspirit
8 years ago
It's a fucking croc of shit. Big brother...... arsewipes in my opinion. - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
:(
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Many hours of reading last night, and much more to get through yet. Clarification re: Basically, if you're feeling recalcitrant, failure to answer is far cheaper than to give false answers, but it will still break your bank! That depends how long you hold out - I'm given to believe the penalty for false information (10 Penalty Units) is a one off fine, whereas failure to complete the Census form at all bears a single Penalty Unit fine per day until either you or the ABS relents. If anyone is uncertain how they wish to address this matter, it may help you to know that whilst the Census data pertains to circumstances this evening, the deadlines for submission of this data are 18SEP16 to mail in paper forms, and 23SEP16 for online forms. Therefore there is more time available to research and properly consider your position. I'm out tonight and have only intermittent internet access. I intend to make use of the maximum available time.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
there's a rush to redefine and create new clandestine, sub-textual international trade treaties/partnerships where data and information on citizens is the commodity! Our details our demographic our economic habits are traded to other countries!
-
MsSuperFoxy
8 years ago
Completed. Easy peasy. Ms Foxy
-
RHP User
8 years ago
besides it being a dull chore - much like voting but without the sausage sizzle payoff - I don't see what the big carry-on about it is for. If you don't have census data it is hard to do planning at a higher level. The only people I can see with a huge reason to be against be the census would be minority groups receiving targeted benefits that were disproportionately large relative to their size and impact within the population. Complaining about big brother... well... the census data big business already gets about you is much more useful, because they can track what you _actually_ buy and what you do - not what you say you do.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Any of you read that put your religion in as if you don't the Muslims will take over Australia , build more Mosques etc ? The warnings were there in what I read ... I tried to log in late last night , have until the 23rd Sept to submit without the -$180 a day fine after the date . Gee the Census gets hacked full prof ?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Sigh.... I'm not a huge fan of posting any 'real' information about myself online... I can imagine that a good proportion of people complaining about the Census already provide MORE information to private companies via their Facebook / LinkedIn and other social media, as well as every time they use their Woolworths / Coles rewards cards... Just give it a thought folks...
-
RHP User
8 years ago
There are some significant distinctions which need to be made wrt privacy of information gathered and held by organisations. In all legal matters, clear and close definition and interpretation is key. Specifically, the difference between de-identification and anonymisation, and the difference between personal data and sensitive data. It is important to consider too. the Census is ostensibly required for Government statistical rather than administrative purposes. Privacy has been a contentious issue wrt Census for many, many decades. As you quite rightly point out, many people do furnish/release a vast amount of identifiable data each day. Already much of this data (once de-identified) may be cross-matched from multiple sources and re-identified in very close/fine detail. Obviously (as you also point out), the more one participates in social media, rewards programs, use debit and credit cards, use mobile phones and other internet enabled devices etc, the (not necessarily easy, but) easier it becomes to re-identify the source of that data. The Census seeks answers to much more data which is classified as personal and as sensitive, and which is not normally reasonably required to be furnished for provision of goods and services (from any vendor). The more wide-spread, and the more fragmented an individual's personal and sensitive data, the more difficult, time consuming and costly the exercise to cross-match and re-identify. This is a longstanding risk mitigation strategy. Consider the way private enterprise employ multiple sources for the raw materials of production, and how manufacturing facilities are geographically dispersed (to produce sub-assemblies in disparate locations, then finally assemble elsewhere). Consider to how military and other organisations physically disperse Command and Control to minimise the impact/compromise of any single attack. You might even consider how corporate and government travel policies usually limit the number of key personnel on any given flight to mitigate the business risk of incidents. By so readily facilitating the drawing together of people's existing data (by means of SLKs etc), our Government makes it easier not just for government agencies to access this information for legitimate purposes; it renders this data easier and therefore much more attractive to others to seek to access. Already there are organisations (both public/govt and private) who have failed to meet the requirements of the Privacy Act 1988 and the National Privacy Principals. Currently in Australia there is no mandatory data breach reporting Law. Many people will be entirely unaware the extent to which their privacy has been breached except perhaps for the glimpses they get from targeted advertising (as one example). Even those people who do not use Social Media, Rewards Programs, debit/credit cards, internet etc and who do pay cash where possible would be startled to know there still is ample data available to identify them. This is a matter so far progressed it cannot/will not be wound back. Pertinent questions will be directed to what is the minimum personal data and how much sensitive data actually required to effectively plan and deliver the government's various programs (likewise the provision of goods and services from other sources), and how best to safeguard that data. I would suggest (for the above, and yet further reasons too) the Government/ABS's current strategy is seriously flawed. In recognition of the importance of Census data to government planning, another question which might reasonably be asked is: Since the Census and Statistics Act 1905 came into force, the Australian population has been subject to Census in 1911, 1921, 1933, 1947, 1954, 1961, then every five years thereafter. Armed with all of this statistical data and trending analysis, how is it the government consistently struggles (fails?) to adequately make provision for key programs? A bold person might venture to suggest those in authority do not make good use of the data they acquire,. (That may not imply overreach or malicious intent. Then again, it just might).
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I do love your work. I've followed a few of your posts on the topic in the forum. I appreciate the thoroughness with which you have approached this topic in general and the points you are making. I've done a bit of looking into things too, haven't even tried to fill it out yet. :-D I've questioned the census the many times it's been brought out in the years before the peak of the internet, so the net is a fairly new connection in consideration of the possible unwanted dissemination of that information. But... The points you make about having it all in one place (rather then via multiple servers) makes sense. Potential invasions of privacy considering the ease of electronic data dumps. The kick in the guts for me is the fines. As you've posted elsewhere as far as I know. $180 per day delayed to a maximum of 10 and $1,800 for falsifying info. Word of mouth only, I heard the fines are not that easily given out. Will get back on that. :-) In regards to ... Big Brother definition is: a. also Big Brother An omnipresent, seemingly benevolent figure representing the oppressive control over individual lives exerted by an authoritarian government. b. A state, organization, or leader regarded in this manner. [Sense 3, after Big Brother, a character in the novel 1984 by George Orwell.]
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Since the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four the phrase "Big Brother" has come into common use to describe any prying or overly-controlling authority figure, and attempts by government to increase surveillance.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Quoting 'ontology' Since the Census and Statistics Act 1905 came into force, the Australian population has been subject to Census in 1911, 1921, 1933, 1947, 1954, 1961, then every five years thereafter. Armed with all of this statistical data and trending analysis, how is it the government consistently struggles (fails?) to adequately make provision for key programs? A bold person might venture to suggest those in authority do not make good use of the data they acquire,. (That may not imply overreach or malicious intent. Then again, it just might). because the decision makers are subjected to regular election cycles - that's why it's important our judiciary is 'protected' and independent, imagine if judges were subjected to a populist voting to hold their office. Unfortunately I don't think there is a possible way to do this wrt to policy making and planning that does not prevent abuse by corrupt elements. What data don't people want to put on the census for regarding it too personal and private?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I still can't log in. They better not fine me
-
Seachange
8 years ago
Didn't read them and did not see those warnings. IMO, pretty stupid and xenophobic warning though, isn't it? I'm not sure those warnings should and would be allowed. The thing is that the government does not built churches or mosque or temples etc. People do, that is people who live in the area that want a place of worship. with separation between church and state many years ago, people would be smart enough to deduce those warnings as rubbish. Right? But xenophobia lives on.
-
Tall74nHard9
8 years ago
about the Census for me - my mother received the 'letter' to register online with the requisite id number, and I received the paper form to complete. Trouble is, my mother doesn't own a computer and wouldn't know how to use one, whereas I have a computer and could log in (if it worked on the night). Wonder how they used the previous Census info to come up with this stuff-up ? Tall
-
RHP User
8 years ago
You're fine up until September Touch. and I still haven't had a chance to look at the fines which I think is in the newspaper. I think I'll be sending for a paper copy though system is supposed to be up and running now Tall. Summer, finally the system overload has been confirmed and publicly apologized for. Lol, even the phone system went down in the week leading up to the census. I can't imagine why I would have concerns. ;-) Yeah, if they got their census together, they'd have a far better sensitivity to many groups Countrytouch. I was told today that one of the questions asked is for our grandparents surname. I can't tell you how much I've always hated that question. Thanks everyone, this is one of those things that fascinate me considering the many implications.
-
Tall74nHard9
8 years ago
Received a letter today from ABS asking me to please fill in my form or go online to do so.Trouble is, I completed my paper form and mailed it off on the 10th this month, complete with my details showing my details through the window in the back, as requested. I have sent the ABS an email this afternoon, with some appropriate wording about their competency. Tall
-
RHP User
8 years ago
They can pick up the form when they catch us at home.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
finally did it on the 9th Sept gasp, talk about taking it down to the wire
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I got this close .. to doing it today. But first I had to wait 70+ mins on other government business.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
sounds intriguing, on a minister's cabinet was it?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
with the members of the minister's cabinet
-
RHP User
8 years ago
We completed ours on the night prior to the servers being taken offline. It was relatively quick for us. I'm looking forward to seeing the results next year (in a work sense). However, the biggest demographic change is expected to be the shift towards the "No religion" category. As the nation becomes more and more secular, the political justification for direct / indirect funding and tax exemptions of religious activities (approx $30B each and every year) will become more difficult.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
religious things are tax emempt? Why because they have to build a new church lol and 30b dollars, no way?
-
usnow
8 years ago
In the day and age of everything being online and people happy to have this , like tax returns , phone numbers and address's ,banking , buying with your credit card details , why would anyone be too concerned about anything that was in the form , I mean seriously people , what do you think you have to hide ! Usnow .
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Quoting 'usnow' In the day and age of everything being online and people happy to have this , like tax returns , phone numbers and address's ,banking , buying with your credit card details , why would anyone be too concerned about anything that was in the form , I mean seriously people , what do you think you have to hide ! Usnow . I'm a bit with you on this after some thought, they have all our information anyway, and the government has everything linked up now, so they know our name, address, tax file number, how many children we have, income, they know it all. In an ideal world, it would be good if they didn't have access to all that, but those days have gone, and my belief is the core reason for that is tax, the government don't want to miss out on a cent from the person who struggles to put food on the table each week, but seem happy to waste our tax money by the billion on useless things that don't benefit us as a society
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I used to think that tax exempt status was more relevant when I thought the Church was here for Man. Now I think of the time Jesus went to the Temple and drove out the merchants and money changers". Usnow, incredibly simplistically... I don't like being told I have to do it or suffer a fine of potentially $1,800. Peachy
Boards
-
Hot Topics
Topics: 14361 Comments: 120840
-
Girls Ask
Topics: 1355 Comments: 14709
-
Guys Ask
Topics: 2425 Comments: 17234
-
Couples' Corner
Topics: 2405 Comments: 12737
-
Swingers Lifestyle
Topics: 794 Comments: 5154
-
Fetish & Fantasy
Topics: 1148 Comments: 6957
-
Hot Travel
Topics: 622 Comments: 2145
-
LGBT
Topics: 156 Comments: 1150
Forum help
-
Something related with that
-
Going somewhere & want to hook up?
-
Hasn't that topic been posted before?
RHP's popular dating tool
-
Where the heck did that topic go?
Discover what RHP is doing offline
-
RHP member's RL secrets
reply
like
Share