This work is funded by the public via direct donations. There are now four usual methods of donation depending on the needs of the donor: Patroen, Bank Transfer, Stripe & PayPal. The email to use for PayPal is rosie@ausgov.info

Bank: St George
Account Name:'Rose Williams'
Branch Number:112-908
Account Number: 485 746 256

Some people prefer to donate via Bank Transfer: bank transfer either as a one off payment or at regular intervals as then this avoids the fee to me that is charged by Patreon or for other personal reasons. It has the benefit of not having to sign up to a new platform. It can be a good idea to contact me and let me know if you are concerned the details you entered aren't correct - to ensure your money reaches me as intended.

$10
$20
$50

For people who just want a quick way to send money without signing up for anything or visiting a banking site, Stripe allows this via these buttons. The amount is set and is a one-off payment using credit card details. If you put in a valid email address then you should get a receipt. You should see AusGov.info on your bank statement details. The Stripe platform processes all financial information for a secure transation.

Privacy and your donation

Whether a donor is an individual or an organisation, I take privacy issues seriously. In order to avoid breaching people's sense of privacy, unless I am directly contacted about a donation by the donor, I do not thank them unless having a direct conversation about a donation.

Having said this, I believe that the best advertisement for my work is your support. It is much easier for people to believe others when they speak about the value of my work than when I make my own claims about it. Your willingness to share the reason you support my work is what inspires other people to support my work. Please take a moment every now and then and, if you are happy to be seen publicly supporting my work, share my work with your networks.


Select a topic to display articles. Use the black menu button to display projects.

The dialectical relationship between the Australian census and privacy legislation is about to take another turn.

Censusfail: Why It Happened And What It Means Now


The dialectical relationship between the Australian census and privacy legislation is about to take another turn.

Censusfail: Why It Happened And What It Means Now

The last census was incredibly controversial for reasons that have not been well articluted by the media. The bulk of the media only really came on board in great numbers when the census site went down and caught the attention of the entire country but the privacy sector had been running a campaign for months prior to this event.

My submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry that followed the debacle was effectively a research project that included the results (and data) for an online survey that drew over 500 responses from the public. The survey focused on peoples' experiences with the 2016 census and their feelings around the de-anonymisation of the census.

However, as the submission elaborates, while it took untill 2016 for the government to find an ABS Head willing to de-anonymise the census, this was far from the first time an Australian government had tried. All previous attempts had failed in the face of massive public backlash.

In fact, the formation of Commonwealth privacy legislation in Australia is directly intertwined with past attempts to de-anonymise the census.

It was as a result of the protests of the 1970's censuses, that the government formed the Australian Law Reform Commission to inquire into the balance between the collection and storage of personal information in Australian censuses and the right of the individual to privacy:

The ALRC received a wide-ranging reference on privacy from the federal Attorney-General in April 1976. At the same time, public controversy arose in relation to certain aspects of the census to be held on 30 June 1976, therefore, the Attorney-General requested that the implications of the census for individual privacy be taken into account in the Commission's general reference. The ALRC released a discussion paper Privacy and the Census (ALRC DP 8) in 1978 and its first report, Privacy and the Census (ALRC Report 12), was tabled in federal Parliament in November 1979. (Quote from the ALRC website.)

My submission traces this history back over four decades, placing the current state of affairs in an historical context of previously failed attempts through government documents and media stories of prior events reminiscent of those occurring more recently.

Far from being dismissed, my submission was cited twice in the Final Report to the Inquiry into the 2016 Census and received many endorsements, including from the former Head of the ABS, Bill McLennan who wrote this in his own submission to the Inquiry:

I was impressed by the #Censusfail submission to this Committee. It very clearly showed some good analysis that would have helped the ABS to run a better Census if it had done such research before developing the Census proposal. It also saved me from explaining the current thrust in government with the Government Data Linkage Project, and its likely links to the Census.

Despite the Parliamentary Inquiry in 2016, the government's advice on the legality of using personal information supplied with the 2016 census for purposes other than statistics was accepted. However, the government can not continue it's plan to integrate our administrative data to supply as research data without introducing a new law to make it legal. This law is The Data Sharing and Release Act.

The ABS would like you to know that it disagrees with my interpretation (which is based on arguments from former Heads of the ABS). Kanchan Dutt, Director, Transformation, Internal and Media Communications wrote to me earlier in the year in response to my article on the vulnerability exposed in ABS TableBuilder, claiming that:

Finally, the Data Sharing and Release Act will not override the Privacy Act. Any disclosure of personal information or personal which is authorised or required under Australian law meets the requirements of the Privacy Act and the Australian Privacy Principles by virtue of the condition in Australian Privacy Principle 6 that the disclosure of information is authorised or required by another Australian law.

It appears to be the argument of the ABS, that given the Data Sharing and Relase Act will authorise the integration and access to administrative data that the Privacy Act 1988 allows this under Australian Privacy Principle 6 which allows disclosure where it is 'required or authorised by Australian law'.

To me this is nothing but a circular argument and underlines that this integration is not legally defensible without the new legislation but I'll let you make up your own mind.


The #CensusFail Submission





This research will end without your support. Please see the donation options at the top of the page.


The Koch brothers’ i360 data service is now being used by the Liberal Party of Australia.

Liberal Party Harnesses I360 Big Data In Time For 2019 Federal Election


The Koch brothers’ i360 data service is now being used by the Liberal Party of Australia.

Liberal Party Harnesses I360 Big Data In Time For 2019 Federal Election

What is the difference between spam and phishing and why does it matter?

Don't Be The Next Business To Fall Victim To A Data Breach


What is the difference between spam and phishing and why does it matter?

Don't Be The Next Business To Fall Victim To A Data Breach

This article looks at the potential for collusion between the media and political parties, neither of which are covered by the Privacy Act.

Privacy, Media And Politics: What Are Our Rights?


This article looks at the potential for collusion between the media and political parties, neither of which are covered by the Privacy Act.

Privacy, Media And Politics: What Are Our Rights?

The OAIC is charged with governing both FOI and the Privacy Act. This article traces the early years of the OAIC as it weathers attempts to abolish the office by the Abbott Government.

Taking Over The Corporate Regulators


The OAIC is charged with governing both FOI and the Privacy Act. This article traces the early years of the OAIC as it weathers attempts to abolish the office by the Abbott Government.

Taking Over The Corporate Regulators

This article looks at the privacy and security issues like to arise with attempts to move election voting online or through the use of voting machines.

Deconstructing The Democracy Sausage


This article looks at the privacy and security issues like to arise with attempts to move election voting online or through the use of voting machines.

Deconstructing The Democracy Sausage