Hundreds of Centrelink staff disciplined over privacy violations

Hoo boy. This deserves to be a big news story: Centrelink staff sacked for privacy breaches.

Massive, and I mean massive, breaches of privacy rules at CentreLink, the Australian government agency which co-ordinates welfare and unemployment benefits:

• 5 cases referred to the police;
  
• 19 staff sacked;
  
• "almost 100" quit after being caught out;
  
• "more than 300" face discipline.
  

If this was one or two isolated individuals I would not be concerned. But it's not. It shows that breaches of privacy are rampant in Centrelink.

Only caught because Centrelink installed spyware to monitor their staff's access to records.

Now for the biggie: if this was caught in Centrelink, what about all the other organisations which store private information? Is this problem unique to Centrelink, or unique to Australia? I don't think so.

So how secure is your private information? Not very, I'm afraid to say.

Asylum Seeker Legislation in Australia

Recently, Australian Prime Minister John Howard withdrew his latest Border Protection Bill, to avoid its inevitable defeat in the Australian Senate.

Good riddance! Here's why:

First, it is bad for families. Liberal backbenchers worked hard to
change Australia's refugee processes, so that women and children would
not be locked up inm detention. This bill would have undone those
changes. To lock children up in detention, when it is not needed, is
inhumane.

Second, the bill was to appease Indonesia. I was appalled at the "Pacific
Solution" that the government introduced in 2001. But that, at least,
was in response to concerns in Australia. This 2006 bill was not due
to Australian demand, it was due to Indonesia's protests. When
Indonesia first protested at our giving refuge to 42 West Papuan
asylum seekers, Howard should have said, "It is our business who we
let into our country. Stay out of our internal affairs". To attempt to
change our refugee legislation, in reaction to Indonesian demands, was
a disgrace. Tellingly, Indonesia was quick to protest when the Bill was withdrawn.

Third - contrary to the claims of Liberal Senator Don Randall -
rejecting this bill does not go against the will of the Australian
people. I did not see any polls, but I did not sense any ill-will
among Australian people to these West Papuan asylum seekers. The bill
was unnecessary. There was no Australian demand for it.

Fourth, on the subject of the West Papuans, they were not asylum
shoppers. In 2001, one criticism of the Middle Eastern refugees
arriving was that they were shopping around for the "best" country to
seek asylum in. However this has stopped. Not due to the "Pacific
Solution", but due to changed circumstances in Afghanistan and Iraq,
and due to better co-operation with Indonesia in stopping people
smugglers. But these West Papuans were not shopping around, they went
direct to the nearest country practical to offer them asylum -
straight across the Arafura Sea to Northern Australia.

So well done to all Senators who opposed the Border Protection Bill!

Just testing...

Welcome to the new blog of peter ballard. This is just a test. More to come.