[LINK] [EFA-Privacy] Consumer Data Right Bill tabled

[Bernard Robertson-Dunn]

The devil is always in the detail: (re the explanatory Memorandum)

> Minister’s tasks before designating a sector
> 1.47    In considering the public interest, the Minister may consider
> a range of factors such as whether designation of that data set will
> promote public health by providing information that enables
> individuals to better manage their health, or promote other social goals.

Just as in My Health Record - no mention of  costs - to the person/people.

The costs discussed in the legislation refer to compliance costs, the
costs associated with accessing the data and the cost of doing business.
There is nothing about the real or potential costs consequential costs
to the people involved.

Similarly, the issue of de/re-identification is only vaguely dealt with.
You could drive a truck through section 1.104.

> 1.1  An important consideration in whether data can be considered to
> relate to a ‘reasonably identifiable’ person is what motivations there
> may be to attempt re‑identification. A person will be reasonably
> identifiable where:
>   •  it is technically possible for re-identification to occur
> (whether from the information itself, or in combination with other
> information that may be available), and
>   •  there is a reasonable likelihood of re-identification occurring. 
Any record level data set (i.e. each record has data on an individual)
has a very high probability of being re-identified, especially when
associated with other data sets.

The second bullet point is so subjective as to be meaningless.

IMHO, record level personal health data sets should only be released
under controlled conditions to appropriate non-profit research
organisations.

It is notable that there is no mention of the secondary use of My Health
Record data legislation, either as input into the CDRB or if the CDRB
impacts the secondary use of My Health Record data.


On 14/02/2019 9:33 am, JLWhitaker wrote:
> As I said on the privacy lists, this is Newspeak for "open banking
> legislation". The spin doctors think if the prism is "consumer
> rights", well, that's ok then.
>
> The explanatory memorandum (all over 85 pages of it) says this is for
> banking, energy and telecommunications, but will be rolled out across
> the economy eventually.
>
> Good or bad? And does the consumer REALLY have choice about this or is
> it a Trojan horse to bait and switch just like opt-in became opt-out
> for My Health Record?
>
> Jan
>
> On 14/02/2019 8:40 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
>> Treasury Laws Amendment (Consumer Data Right) Bill 2019
>> Introduced into the HoR Wed 13 Feb
>>
>> https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6281
>>
>>
>>
>
>

-- 

Regards
brd

Bernard Robertson-Dunn
Canberra Australia
email: brd at iimetro.com.au
web:   www.drbrd.com
web:   www.problemsfirst.com