53
Tonight is census night!
(www.abc.net.au)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
53 points (100.0% liked)
Australia
5114 readers
103 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Apparently no one lives at my house.
In the current era of populism I think it's daft to be providing this type of information to a government department.
I'd pay the fine if that's what it came down to.
I mean, don't blame the government when they make bad policy decisions then. You can't make informed decisions if you don't know the demographics for particular areas.
Remember when the government noticed women were half of everyone and so gave them voting rights?
I'm kind of curious what decisions you think the government will actually make relying on my census response.
Firstly, the data is normalised to account for erroneous responses like mine. That's basic statistical analysis.
Secondly, anyone who thinks pennies are going to rain down from heaven now the government knows someone lives in your house does not understand politics nor budgets.
Not sure about your specific government but typically they would use data like number of people in a certain area and income class to decide where bus stops should be located, number of people with a certain religion to determine zoning of religious faculties that can be constructed, number of people with young children to determine where schools need to be built, etc.
People always complain about schools being to crowded and little portable classrooms becoming permanent and it's partially due to not knowing how many children those schools should be built to accomodate.
Sorry, that's just nonsense.
Obviously, bus stops are located according to direct observations like the number of passengers at existing bus stops, and the residential addresses of card holders and so on.
Religious faculties are not constructed or approved according to a quota, but by application. If a religious group applies to a local council to have a building approved for that use, then provided they comply with local policy it will be approved. Councils do not create jedi knight training facilities because the census indicates they ought to do so.
Funding for schools is determined by, perhaps surprisingly, the number of students who are enrolled at that school. I would challenge you to show me some evidence of funding that's been provided to a school on the basis of a census, but we both know that's an absurdity. Ridiculous.
The suggestion that pennies will rain down from heaven once the government is aware of my existence just doesn't withstand a moment's critical thinking. The notion is merely to motivate you to provide your information in the mistaken belief that you're serving the greater good.
This isn't the token fine for not voting. It's $364 per day.
white cis het man detected
But if it's anonymous how do they know you didn't do it?
Besides, I have genuinely not received or seen any official information about when the census is or how to do it - i only know it happened (is happening?) from people i know talking about having done it. How i was even meant to be informed?
That's why they ask for your name and address at the start - it's to verify that you have completed the census. Thar section is not tied to the actual census questions that come afterwards.
You're meant to have received your code, along with other details, in the mail.
It's tied to your address. Every address with at least one person staying in it on census night has to fill out a form.
Hmm, interesting, maybe I've been blacklisted. Though most of my family have ADHD, so more likely one of them brought in the mail and put it "somewhere safe"
That's true but the risk of being fined is infinitesimal.
Very few people are fined each time, less than 100 australia wide:
https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/no-one-yet-prosecuted-over-2016-census-boycott/8315898
The fine is $364 per day up to a maximum of 10 days for refusing to follow the direction of a statistician.
So if you don't complete the form, their policy is to contact you in person and ask, then give you a direction to complete the form. If you refuse to follow that direction they may refer you to court but that's not necessarily the case.
They also have a policy of only referring people when their refusal harms the quality of the census. That pretty much means they're only going to fine conscientious objectors, and assholes.
In my own case, I did not refuse to complete the form. I completed the form incorrectly. The potential fine is $3,640 or something. I would be interested to see a case in which they could apply that. Without an admission of guilt it would be difficult to prosecute and ultimately yield no benefit.
On purpose? That's so much worse than just not filling it at all. That's a total arsehole move.
LOL. No it's not.
Basic statistical analysis requires data to be normalised.
It's trivial to account for non-responses like mine.
The gov could figure out 98% of what you put down on the census using other means. I.e im trans. They can work that out by listing my perscriptions easy peasy.
I am guessing you have never actually worked for the government.
Data are heavily siloed and in broadly completely incompatible formats. If we take the pathological case then yes, a sufficiently determined actor could reconstruct most of the data which you submit.
This actor would however need several years, a team of data scientists, a large team of software developers, and a supply of xanax to handle the stress.
They don't know I'm bi if I don't tell them though. Also the ABS probably doesn't have access to Medicare data
Thats true, but you can lie or prefer to not say (at least on that Question).
Also I meant the gov in general, the government has access to my health record albeit with presumably lots of privacy laws preventing random non consensual access.
There are also private companies data collection to worry about of course (which one should put a lot of effort in preventing).
My point is a census in terms of privacy is so low down on the list on privacy issues. If anything its very private, given the various laws preventing access.
Not to say you should out yourself because of that, and choosing prefer not to say or straight is ok, just making a general point on the census.
Census privacy to me seems most important within the household – they made it easy for any person to have their own form to fill in private and they tell you how to make sure your privately completed form is counted instead of the one your conservative father filled out on your behalf ("the most complete form will be used")
That's not really an argument in favor of the census though.
If they already have the information then they don't need the census.
I agree that that isn't a good argument.
A better argument is that this is how the government gets a sense for what the population is. For example, a growing percentage of "non-religious" or (to a lesser extent) non-Christian religious makes it harder for the government to continue justifying subsidies for religious schools and special status for religious organisations. A higher percentage of people saying they travel to work by bike or public transport helps justify increasing funding for those methods over continued motornormativity.
If you care so much you should swap answers with someone less secure than you.
I won't paint a target on my head to make it easier for pollies to avoid leaving their office and meeting people. Entire branches of my family tree are missing because of censuses being used for evil.
So uh, good luck with guilting people about it. Maybe target the surveillance state and fash instead
You're conspiracy bullshit doesn't work on non-cookers.
Why not use your secure position to boost services for minorities if you think it works
wtf are you talking about?
I don't think political parties will rely on census data for that. Once reference groups demonstrate that a policy of reducing those concessions has broad support it will be a policy. It doesn't matter what the census says.
They measure this with direct observations - how many cyclists use pathways et cetera. There's no city in Australia that's going to look at census data and decide to invest in bike infrastructure.
Demand for public transport is measured by... the numbers of people using public transport.
The funding thing is a common argument but in almost all cases it seems that direct observations would be more useful.