Australian Bureau of Statistics under Kalisch continues to prove that Census 2016 was expensive as well as a statistical and public relations disaster

Information coming out of the once-proud Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) again proves that it approached the most radical change to the national census of population and housing with an almost complete lack of understanding of the mood of the populace¹.

ABC News, 23 December 2016:

Taxpayers spent close to $200,000 to turn the Sydney Opera House green to promote the 2016 census, without any clear reference to the national survey.

The seven sails of the national landmark were lit up for two nights but did not include any information about the census, the website, a hashtag or branding.

Internal documents show it cost taxpayers $192,000 for setup, equipment hire, management and support.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) chief statistician David Kalisch described it as a "major public relations opportunity" and said it was likely to attract "social media influencers".

"This will maximise awareness and engagement with the census, and help create a national conversation," Mr Kalisch wrote in the document.

The Opera House turned green for census night and the night before but the social media conversation was dominated by the website's failure.

There was a 40-hour outage caused by four Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks that had been the subject of a blame game between the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and contractors for months.

The Opera House was part of a national campaign to light up landmarks with the colour green.

The Melbourne Arts Centre, Canberra's Telstra Tower, Brisbane's City Hall and the Darwin Convention Centre were some of the 20 sites to "go green" for the census…..

The total census campaign media budget was $12 million.

#CENSUSfail is believed to have increased the cost 2016 national census by as much as $30 million.

In late September 2016 the ABS began processing and analysing the data collected to provide high-quality information for all communities across Australia. This process, including the Post Enumeration Survey (PES), will ultimately determine the overall response rate and coverage of the 2016 Census and the Independent Assurance Panel on 2016 Census of Population and Housing data sat for the first time in November 2016.

Currently ABS alleges that the national census response rate exceeds 96 per cent - comprising over 4.9 million online forms and over 3.5 million paper forms representing 8.4 million households/dwellings.

A rather strange statement by the Bureau, given it previously stated in the lead up to the census that it expected to survey close to 10 million dwellings and afterwards that there were exactly 9.8 million dwellings within the survey pool.

The failure to genuinely meet response rate requirements being papered over by the many personal forms in addition to the household ones [Senate Economics References Committee, 24 November 2016, inquiry report, 2016 Census: issues of trust, p.80].  Presumably these personal forms were official census forms which stated the person was in transit (travellers, homeless, & hospital patients) – all est.1.2 million of them if the deliberately vague assertion of the Bureau is to be believed.

The next public confidence hurdle for the failed 9 August 2016 Census comes when preliminary population and dwelling counts are released in April 2017 – given that so many people are aware of friends or acquaintances who deliberately refused to supply name and/or address or filled in their census forms with inaccurate or misleading information in an attempt to avoid having their genuine personal information retained by the federal government indefinitely in a national database for as yet unstated or unexplained purposes.

NOTES:

1. Previous North Coast Voices posts on 2016 Census here.

    Bill McLennan, 2016, Privacy and the 2016 Census.

SGS Australian Cities Accounts 2014-15 and regional New South Wales

SGS Economics and Planning’s Australian Cities Accounts 2014-15 makes some interesting observations about regional New South Wales.

When looking at GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT - VOLUME MEASURE 2014-15: Regional NSW it finds this economic profile:

GDP ($ millions) $128,944 - that is $128.9 billion

Annual GDP Growth 2014-15 0.6%

Average Annual Growth (04-05 to 14-15) 0.8%

Share of NSW GDP (2014-15) 8.0%

Contribution to GDP Growth Whole Period (1989-90 to 2014- 15) 4.3%

“Growth of 0.6 per cent in Regional New South Wales was in the face of weakness across a range of industries”.

“…worst performing regions in per capita terms were Regional New South Wales, Brisbane and Queensland”.

Economy.id estimates that the Gross Regional Product for 2015 in Northern Rivers local government areas was worth:

Clarence Valley - $1.73 billion

Ballina Shire - $1.77 billion

Byron Shire - $1.47 billion

Lismore City - $2.05 billion

Kyogle Council supplied its own data which did not go beyond 2012, stating that its GRP was $330.8 million in 2011/12.

Total Estimated  Northern Rivers GRP – in excess of $7.02 billion.

Most Australians don't believe that they live in a classless society

Essential Research, 29 November 2016:

Essential Research vs Morgan Research on Australian support levels for "Muslim immigration"

Image from 4plebs.org thread of

The Australian 21 September 2016

Roy Morgan Research, 26 October 2016:

In stark contrast to the widely reported Essential Research Poll in mid-September that claimed Australians opposed Muslim Immigration 49% cf. 40%, independent research by Roy Morgan shows Australians continue to support Muslim immigration (58% cf. 33%) as well as Asylum Seeker Immigration (66% to 25%).

Five weeks ago, Australians were bombarded with the news that we, as a nation, or the majority of us, did not want Muslims coming into the country – based on a poll by Essential Research.

I said at the time, in several interviews (Listen to radio interview with 2SER), that we believed it was highly unlikely that these results were true.  Roy Morgan surveys over several years from 2010 to 2015, showed majority support for Muslims, refugees and others immigrating to Australia. We believed it highly unlikely that sentiment would have changed so dramatically. The latest Roy Morgan Research showed indeed Australians continue to support Muslim Immigration, albeit with a reduced majority.

It is crucial that public opinion surveys on such important issues as this are independent and conducted with a sample which is truly representative of the Australian population.

The increasingly prevalent use of internet surveys using ‘Commercial panels’ of respondents is extraordinarily dangerous. ‘Commercial panels’ are typically recruited in a variety of ways – opt-in, competitions, acquired email lists etc. The size of the ‘Commercial panel’ can never make up for the unknown and unknowable biases.

We see it as a little like the ‘sub-prime’ fiasco in the US that was at the heart of the Global Financial Crisis. Combining large quantities of ‘high risk’ mortgages into packages and re-labelling them didn’t make them any less risky.

When it comes to sampling the Australian population – combining ‘highly skewed’ lists of people doesn’t magically create a representative sample representing a cross-section of Australians.

Roy Morgan conducted this latest survey, and previous waves of the research, at our own cost because we believe it is important the people of Australia are accurately represented on an issue of such social, human and moral importance.

Click here to see the full results of the latest Roy Morgan survey on attitudes to immigration and population.

Roy Morgan Research, 25 October 2016:

Muslim Immigration

Support for Muslim immigration is down 7% from a year ago (65% support in October 2015), although it is up 4% from July 2010 (54% support).

Importantly, a majority of L-NP supporters (51% support cf. 36% oppose), ALP supporters (67% support cf. 25% oppose), Greens supporters (88% support cf. 5% oppose) and supporters of Independents/ Others (58% support cf. 34% oppose) all support Muslim immigration.

However, the overwhelming majority of One Nation supporters are opposed to Muslim immigration (87% opposed cf. 4% support).

Immigration Levels & Population

Now 40% (up 3%) of Australians support immigration remaining about the same and a further 21% (down 11%) want to see immigration levels increased; this constitutes a clear majority of Australians 61% (down 8%) who support immigration remaining the same or increasing while 34% (up 8%) want immigration levels reduced and 5% (unchanged) can’t say.

Australians are split on the effect of immigrants on Australia’s culture and way of life: However, there has been a negative shift in the last year – back to lower than recorded in 2010. 32% (down 5%) of Australians believe immigration has a positive effect on Australia; 32% (up 1%) believe immigration has a negative effect while 25% (up 6%) believe immigration has little effect and 11% (down 2%) can’t say.

Most Australians want relatively moderate population growth – 34% (up 2%) want a population under 30 million in 2046, and only 24% (down 6%) want a population of 35 million or more. This is a shift away from growth levels that were seen as acceptable a year ago – but nowhere near the 2010 levels when 56% wanted a population under 30 million in the year 2040.

An est. 2.99 million people including 731,300 children are living below the poverty line in Australia, the 15th richest country in the world today

This was the Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) tweeting on 15 October 2016 on the eve of Anti-Poverty Week, in the 15^th richest nation in the world based on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.

And these are some of the statistics informing its comment on the entrenched inequality in federal government economic and social policy in a country where in 2016 every person is nominally worth an est. $48,288 GDP per annum. 

Snapshot of poverty in Australia – in 2014:

· The poverty line (50% of median income) for a single adult was $426.30 a week. For a couple with 2 children, it was $895.22 a week.

· 2,990,300 million people (13.3% of the population), were living below the poverty line, after taking account of their housing costs.

· 731,300 children under the age of 15 (17.4% of all children) were living below the poverty line.

· Child poverty in Australia increased by 2 percentage points over the decade 200304 to 2013- 14.

· 36.1% of people receiving social security payments were living below the poverty line, including 55% of those receiving Newstart Allowance, 51.5% receiving Parenting Payment, 36.2% of those receiving Disability Support Pension, 24.3% receiving Carer Payment, and 13.9% of those on the Age Pension.

· 57.3% of people below the poverty line relied upon social security as their main income and 32.1% relied upon wages as their main income.

· Between 2012 and 2014, poverty rates increased for: children in lone parent families (36.8 to 40.6%), those receiving Youth Allowance (50.6 to 51.8% and those receiving Parenting Payment (47.2 to 51.5%). They remained very high (61.4% to 59.9%) from 2007 to 2014 for unemployed households.

· The vast majority of people below the poverty line were in rental housing in 2014 (59.7%), with most in private rental housing (44.2%). Only 15.5% of people living below the poverty line were home-owners.

The Poverty in Australia Report 2016 was produced in partnership with the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of NSW, with the support of the Australian Communities Foundation (Social Justice Fund), St Vincent de Paul Society, Mission Australia, and the Salvation Army. [ACOSS, 16 October 2016]

DOWNLOAD REPORT AT: http://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Poverty-inAustralia-2016.pdf

The ACOSS media release of 16 October stated:

The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) today released a new report showing that 731,300 children or 17.4% of all children in Australia are living in poverty, an increase of 2 percentage points over the past 10 years (from 2004-2014).

The report finds that nearly three million people were living in poverty in Australia in 2014, or 13.3% of the general population.

“The overall picture from the last decade is one of persistent and entrenched poverty across the community with an increase in child poverty.

It is a national shame that after 25 years of economic growth, we have not done better at changing this trajectory and ensuring our most precious national resource, our children, are given the best possible start in life,” said ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie.

“Those most at risk are children in lone parent families, who are more than three times likely to be living in poverty (40.6%) than those from couple families (12.5%). Since 2012, the poverty rate for children in lone parent families has gone up from 36.8 to 40.6%.

“The housing profile of people below poverty highlights the concentration of disadvantage in the rental market. The vast majority of people below the poverty line are in rental housing (59.7%), with most in private rental housing (44.2%). Only 15.5% of people living below the poverty line were home-owners.

“The report confirms that people who are unemployed are at greatest risk of poverty, with 63.2% living in poverty. Unsurprisingly, the majority of people below the poverty line relied on social security as their main source of income (57.3%), but a significant proportion received wages as their main income (32%). This indicates that having a job is no guarantee of keeping people above the breadline, especially if the job is low paying and insecure.

“Our report shows those doing it the toughest are overwhelmingly people living on the $38 a day Newstart payment, 55% of whom are in poverty. This is followed by families on Parenting Payment (51.5%), the majority of whom are lone parents with children.

“This report is a further wake up call to the Government to address the inadequacy of the lowest income support payments and bolster support to low income families through the family payments system. It is also a reminder that housing remains the biggest cost of living issue for households and must be addressed as a policy priority.

“Newstart and Youth Allowance are $110 and $158 a week below the poverty line respectively. Along with improvements to training and employment supports, an increase to these payments of at least $50 a week would go some way to alleviating poverty and improve people’s chances of finding paid work.

“The alarming increase in child poverty revealed by this report should also act as an urgent appeal to senators to reject further cuts to family payments, currently before the upper house. The cuts would strip another $60 a week from single parent families. The current proposal to withhold Newstart support for young people for up to four weeks should also be rejected. Both proposals would likely lead to increased poverty.

“At the start of Anti-Poverty Week, we call on all political leaders to put reducing poverty at the centre of the policy agenda. This must include assessing the poverty impact of all major policy changes,” Dr Goldie said.

The OECD Pensions At A Glance 2015 statistics indicate that 36 per cent of Australians receiving the aged pension also live below the poverty line – that’s well over 800,000 older people.

The Turnbull Government, like the Abbott Government before it, will quickly blame the poor for this problem as an excuse for inaction on its part.

This Anti-Poverty Week we can all email or ‘phone our federal MPs and senators and tell them there is no excuse for this level of poverty in a country which has experienced twenty-five years of continuous economic growth.

Contact details for member of parliament can be found at: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Members

Even after all these years is male bias still affecting women's chances of surviving heart disease?

It has been known for many years that there are differences in how symptoms of heart disease present in male and female patients, yet it appears that this knowledge is still not translating into better health management practices when assessing and treating women with cardiovascular disease and heart failure.

Excerpts from Australian Catholic University, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Hidden Hearts: Cardiovascular Risk and Disease in Australian Women, September 2016:

* Executive summary/Key findings

In the absence of a true appreciation of the burden and impact of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among Australian women, coupled with a lack of consistent, Australia-wide data, we compiled this report. Using the best available information, we reveal a number of key figures that should concern all Australians:

The five most common forms of CVD are highly prevalent in Australian women aged 35 years and over with 410,000, 177,000 and 162,000 affected by coronary artery disease (CAD), the form of heart failure (HF) most commonly linked to CAD and atrial fibrillation (AF), respectively.

An additional minimum of 90,000 and 30,000 women are hospitalised due to stroke and peripheral artery disease (PAD), each year. In 2016, 21,000, 14,000, 19,000, 12,000 and 3,000 Australian women will have suffered their first hospital admissions with CAD, HF, AF, stroke and PAD, respectively – see Figure 1.

Tragically, approximately 3,400 Australian women each year will suffer a sudden and fatal cardiac event without ever reaching hospital. Every year, these five conditions provoke a minimum of 260,000 (CAD), 73,000 (HF), 122,000 (AF), 90,000 (stroke) and 30,000 (PAD) hospital admissions among Australian women – see Figure 1.

Even with hospital treatment all forms of CVD are deadly and disabling with one in nine (2,200) women admitted for the first time with CAD dead within 28-days, and more than one third admitted for the first time with HF or stroke dead within 12 months.

The annual estimated cost of hospital care for the most common forms of CVD among Australian women alone is more than $3 billion. Within an ageing population in whom levels of most risk factors are at historically high levels, the burden of CVD among Australian women is set to increase for the foreseeable future.

There is still much to be learned in best preventing and treating CVD in Australian women; particularly in vulnerable individuals/communities.

*

* It is well recognised that the natural history and profile of women with CVD are typically different from their male counterparts.

Current management guidelines reflect a male bias due to the poor representation of women in clinical trials of new therapies.

Women are more likely to display dose-related adverse drug events from CVD pharmacotherapies due to smaller body size, higher body fat, different

metabolism and more kidney dysfunction.

Disparity also exists in cardiac rehabilitation with women failing to attend more often than men in addition to clinicians tending to refer men more frequently.

* Evidence-based management for most forms of CVD are based on clinical trials that have a higher proportion of younger men and/or less complex cases.

* CVD disproportionately affects the Indigenous peoples of Australian and in particular Indigenous women who develop and die from CVD at a much younger age.

* CVD represents an enormous health issue for Australian women. It requires a dedicated response, from the community to governments to minimise already high rates of highly preventable cardiovascular events.

Women living in the Northern Rivers region should note that in 2010-2011, the leading cause of death in the Northern NSW Local Health District  was circulatory disease (which includes cardiovascular disease), which was significantly higher than for all NSW - 193/100,000 compared to 167/100,000 according to the December 2015 health fact sheet produced by the NSW North Coast Public Health Unit.

Australians continue to increase data consumption in 2016

Australian Government Dept. of Communications and the Arts, media release, 7 October 2016:

Australian Internet activity statistics – June 2016

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has released the Internet Activity, Australia, June 2016 (cat no 8153.0).

This release presents key indicators on the use of the internet by business, government, and households, as collected from the Internet Activity Survey conducted in respect of the three months ended 30 June 2016. 

Fast facts include (year-on-year represents June 2016 compared to June 2015):

Internet subscriber numbers pushed past 13 million, with a year-on-year increase of 4 per cent to 13.3 million

While there was an almost 130 per cent year-on-year increase in the number of fibre based subscriptions, subscription numbers across other access types remained relatively stable both year-on-year and from the quarter ended December 2015.

Data downloaded via mobile handsets continues to grow rapidly, with a 34 per cent increase from the December quarter and a 69 per cent increase year-on-year.

Data consumption continues to grow, with 2.1 million terabytes downloaded in the three months ended 30 June 2016. There was 51 per cent growth for total data downloaded year-on-year.

See the ABS website for detailed data on the release: 8153.0 - Internet Activity.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/

Australian Government Data Retention: refraining from saying told you so......

ABC News, 29 September 2016:

The Health Department has removed data from its website amid an investigation into whether personal information has been compromised.

Australian Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim has launched an investigation after academics found it was possible to decrypt some service provider ID numbers in the Medicare Benefits Schedule and Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule datasets.

In a statement, the Department of Health said the dataset published on data.gov.au did not include names or addresses of service providers and no patient information was identified.

"However, as a result of the potential to extract some doctor and other service provider ID numbers, the Department of Health immediately removed the dataset from the website to ensure the security and integrity of the data is maintained," it stated.

"No patient information has been compromised, and no information about the health service providers has been publicly identified or released."

Further comment has been sought.

The Guardian, 24 September 2016:

The Australian Bureau of Statistics inadvertently released contact names linked to more than 5,000 Queensland businesses in what was described as a “human error”.

The breach is one of 14 the ABS has reported to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner since 2013, and was released to Guardian Australia under freedom of information laws.

The ABS has come under scrutiny over its handling of the 2016 census, initially for the extended retention of names and addresses for a period of four years. It then faced further criticism after the census website crashed, which it attributed to a series of foreign attacks.

While none of the breaches reported to the OAIC relates to the handling of any census data, some do highlight errors in the handling of other surveys as well as failures to correctly de-identify data, which is one of the criticisms raised by privacy advocates about the increased retention of census data.

The Canberra Times, 4 October 2016:

The federal government is caught up in a second data privacy scare, this time involving a massive data-set on more then 96,000 of its public servants amid fears their confidential information might not be secure.

In the second potentially serious Commonwealth data breach to become public in less than a week, the public service's workplace authority has confirmed that it has withdrawn the data gathered in its massive annual employee census from public view.

It is feared that identification codes for departments and agencies could be used to identify the individual public servants who filled in the census, the largest workplace survey undertaken in Australia, on condition of anonymity.

The data has been taken down from official websites to be washed of any features that could be used to breach the privacy of government officials.

But the Australian Public Service Commission has confirmed the data-set was downloaded nearly 60 times before the take-down, meaning the raw information is in circulation with no way to control how it is used or distributed further......

#CENSUSfail: so there was this little survey....

On 21 September 2016 The Sydney Morning Herald reported:

Almost 95 per cent of households have completed a census form despite an embarrassing website outage on census night and lingering political controversy over the national headcount.

The Bureau of Statistics says it already has sufficient data for a "high quality" census, ahead of the deadline for forms on Friday.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) also tries to pretend that refusal to complete the census form is the only civil disobedience it has to contend with when collating household responses.

However a little survey which was included in one submission to the Senate Economics References Committee Inquiry into the 2016 Census indicates that the ABS may have other problems with reliability of the data it can subtract from some Census questions.

The possibility that false information has become a significant factor in Census data sets is buttressed by previous findings in the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) Community Attitudes to Privacy Survey Research Report 2013.

Responses of the 1,000 participants in the OAIC combination fixed line/mobile 'phone privacy survey resulted these percentages:

More concerned about providing personal information electronically or online than were 5 years ago – 67%

Concerned about possibility of becoming victim of identity theft or fraud in the next year – 69%

Provided false personal details when completing online forms – 31%

Provided false name when completing online forms – 30%

Refused to deal with government agency/public sector organisation due privacy concerns - 23% 

At some time have refused to supply personal information – 90%.

Excerpt from that little submission to the current Senate inquiry:

---

Q4 If you did fill out the 2016 Census, did you include your real name and address?

This question was required and had 3 answer options from which respondents could choose only one: Yes, No and other.

A substantial majority (74%) of respondents either did not fill out the census form at all or responded in ways intended to frustrate efforts to share their information in ways that could identify them as individuals, match their census data to other data or track their census data from one census to the next. The commonly found terms below are not mutually exclusive of one another.

This high number of people who have chosen not to complete the census or refused specific questions/ removed identifying information is directly relevant to the Inquiry Terms of Reference seeking feedback on impacts on data quality for the 2016 census.

blank false undisclosed persona name pencil postcode address necessary initials trackvariation

Click on the commonly used terms to explore responses or click here to display all responses alphabetically

54 comments provided under 'other'

9/1/2016 8:06 PM : address only.

8/30/2016 8:17 PM : Blank address- name The Householder

9/3/2016 2:05 PM : census not done. Not going to be done either

8/30/2016 11:44 PM : completed address- left names blank

9/2/2016 6:49 AM : created a new persona for street address

9/1/2016 5:19 PM : Current address was already on the form- provided suburb and postcode for other addresses.

9/1/2016 7:10 PM : False name

9/4/2016 11:04 AM : False name- address- and some personal details. Only what I consider relevant to stastical analysis was completed approximately accurately.

9/1/2016 9:25 PM : false name- correct address

9/1/2016 5:38 PM : Filled in address but gave name as UNDISCLOSED

9/1/2016 6:53 PM : First name only. Make the computer work that little bit harder.

8/30/2016 6:35 PM : Gave correct address- no name

8/30/2016 7:08 PM : Gave first name- not last

9/3/2016 5:04 PM : I cut out NAD and identifying bar codres before returning the form

9/3/2016 10:59 AM : I did- but am unhappy about having to do so under threat of a fine

9/2/2016 5:48 PM : I didn't put my real name

8/30/2016 8:17 PM : I do not intend to use my name or address

9/3/2016 7:07 PM : I included a false name for privacy and security reasons.

9/1/2016 8:42 PM : I included it in the palest of blue coloured pencil- so it could not be scanned but required dedicated effort AND inckuded cover letter saying it was complted under duress asnd in great anger at them compromising such an important process.

9/1/2016 6:25 PM : I intend to leave name and address blank

8/30/2016 10:03 PM : I intend to leave name- all addresses (both current and past)- and age blank- to frustrate creation of an SLK or any possible link to past census data

9/3/2016 2:04 PM : I left name blank but the address was already printed on the form

9/1/2016 5:49 PM : I made a statement of objection but I gave Postcode.

9/7/2016 9:09 AM : I made my address suburb only with previous addresses

8/30/2016 7:33 PM : I provided a false name but address and other details were true

8/30/2016 5:05 PM : I put in my postcode and suburb only.

9/2/2016 11:50 AM : I put not necessary for purpose of Census data

9/3/2016 1:54 AM : I redacted identifying information and competed the data section truthfully

9/1/2016 9:15 PM : I used a false name but real address. [This should be a category]

9/6/2016 9:55 PM : i will be using a false name

9/8/2016 5:08 PM : I will do it but am unhappy about it and have no wish to take it seriously again. I think the info will be used for any purpose the govt wants and fear lack of security.

9/1/2016 4:07 PM : I will fill in the Census form when asked to in writing by the Chief Statistician. When I fill it in- I will omit my name and address details.

9/2/2016 11:35 AM : I will leave blank space for my name on the paper form.

9/3/2016 1:12 PM : I will not fill in the form if this is required.

8/30/2016 8:02 PM : I would never provide my name. The ABS is only authorised to hold statistical dat!

9/3/2016 3:45 PM : I'll use false name if/when I do it

8/30/2016 7:08 PM : If I complete the paper form- I will be leaving off my name and address. Still debating whether to do this or boycott.

8/30/2016 7:49 PM : if instructed by chief ABS to complete form- I will not include my name and add

9/1/2016 6:04 PM : Just address as it was printed on the form won't get names though as I feel names make the census a data trawling tool.

9/3/2016 7:27 AM : Misrepresentation of the depth of data linkage-cross referencing and retention

8/30/2016 6:56 PM : No name. Correct address

9/1/2016 6:29 PM : Not in Aus

9/2/2016 8:11 AM : Put initials

8/30/2016 8:20 PM : Real address but a blank name

9/1/2016 5:18 PM : Real address- as it was printed on the paper- fake names.

8/30/2016 6:05 PM : Removed all tracking items on form

9/1/2016 5:30 PM : silent voter ...omitted name

9/1/2016 5:57 PM : Tossed up + in the end did a variation

9/7/2016 5:32 PM : Used a very runny ink from a fountain pen which might 'accidently' smear

9/1/2016 9:21 PM : used married name- which I don't use in real life

9/1/2016 6:21 PM : Yes I did- but reluctantly!!

8/30/2016 6:58 PM : yes- but i didn't really want to

8/31/2016 10:36 PM: Names and DOB blank

9/10/2016 2:44 PM : Stated suburb-postcode-age and gender.