Sorry Allan - It was just the headline !!
The link provided is the source information.
The whole point is that 39% of Australia dont like the extraordinary change in Census personal information, they have taken upon themselves to do in order to make millions to the great potential detriment of the public.
There is 110 years of extremely well understood meaning and the intention of the Act surrounding the Census and they have unilaterally decided to do what suits their best interests.
There was no consultation, no referendum, no parliamentary debate, no legislative changes - and they deliberately and deceitfully sprang it on the public with no time to protest or stay the process.
Its not an offence to not provide your name because they dont have the right to force you to provide it in the first place !
A point that seems lost on so many.
Its optional and entirely voluntary and they have been relying on this approach for years.
But they are portraying otherwise and that is neither legal nor ethical and we should expect much better of our government agencies and demand better when they fail.
I am sure that half the problem that has occurred is due to civil disobedience because that is the only mechanism that most average aussies can take.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allan_L
Sorry Rally, but that is not what the articles says.!
That part of the article (quoted below) is referring to the last question on the census which asks for permission for your name (already provided in Q2) to be kept by the National Archives of Australia, and then made publicly available after 99 years. (which is perfectly OK for respondents to decline)
I responded with my name in Question 2, BUT declined this last question about including it in the archive.
I could not see any reference or comment in your article, on how many refused to provide their names (or falsified them) in Question 2.
(which is technically an offence)
NONETHELESS:
I would have to agree the whole thing was a shamozzle!
|