Discussion Paper proposals

Research on attitudes to privacy

67.84 In DP 72, the ALRC noted that better research on attitudes to privacy was needed to support evidence-based policy making in the future. The ALRC proposed that the Australian Government fund a longitudinal study of the attitudes of Australians to privacy.[87]

67.85 There was strong support for the proposed longitudinal study.[88] The Public Interest Advocacy Centre noted that the study would differ from the cross-sectional attitudinal surveys previously undertaken by the OPC because it would examine changes in the attitudes of individuals over a period of time.[89] The OPC listed many of the benefits that could be gained from the research that would enhance the role of the OPC. It disagreed, however, with the ALRC’s view that it was not the appropriate body to conduct such a study. It submitted that it should play a central part in the overall management of the study and, in particular, that it should have strategic input into the study at the planning stages.[90]

Privacy education for children and young people

67.86 In DP 72, the ALRC indicated that it did not propose the regulation of the practice of online social networking. Instead, the ALRC expressed the view that children, young people, teachers and parents should be educated about social networking websites. This education should highlight the dangers associated with online social networking, and provide advice on how to use social networking websites safely and appropriately.[91]

67.87 The ALRC noted that concerns about the privacy practices of children and young people in the online environment reflected a broader concern about the lack of awareness of children and young people of privacy issues and laws. The ALRC made a number of proposals aimed at developing and delivering educational material on privacy to children and young people. It proposed that:

  • the OPC should develop and publish educational material about privacy issues aimed at children and young people;[92]

  • NetAlert should include specific guidance on using social networking websites as part of its educational material on internet safety;[93] and

  • state and territory education departments should incorporate education about privacy, and in particular privacy in the online environment, into school curriculums.[94]

67.88 Few stakeholders commented on the ALRC’s view that it was not appropriate to attempt to regulate online social networking. The Law Society of New South Wales agreed with it, noting that rapid changes in internet-based technology would mean any regulatory measures would be outdated and obsolete within a short time frame, possibly even before the measures came into force.[95]

67.89 There was strong support for the ALRC’s privacy education proposals.[96] The OPC supported the proposal that it develop and publish educational material about privacy issues aimed at children and young people.[97] Medicare Australia also supported the proposal, particularly if the material addressed issues that arise in the context of the handling of children and young people’s health and claims information.[98]

67.90 A number of stakeholders commented specifically on the need for education about privacy in the online environment. The Australasian Compliance Institute commented that:

An education campaign would be appropriate particularly around the possible detriment or damage to reputation that a young person could potentially suffer in the long term if certain personal information is divulged then, for example, as adults, they later find themselves in the public eye, or in positions where fitness and propriety requirements have to be satisfied. This will also assist with other concerns in relation to young people for instance, identity theft, predatory behaviour and personal safety.[99]

67.91 ACMA agreed with the proposal to extend the role of the NetAlert scheme to cover social networking, and noted that strong partnerships between government, industry and community sectors are essential to ensure that the message of educational campaigns about privacy is effectively communicated.[100]

[87]Australian Law Reform Commission, Review of Australian Privacy Law, DP 72 (2007), Proposal 59–1.

[88]Australian Privacy Foundation, Submission PR 553, 2 January 2008; Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Submission PR 548, 26 December 2007; Australian Communications and Media Authority, Submission PR 522, 21 December 2007; Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 499, 20 December 2007; ACT Government Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services, Submission PR 495, 19 December 2007; Office of the Victorian Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 493, 19 December 2007; National Children’s and Youth Law Centre, Submission PR 491, 19 December 2007; Queensland Government, Submission PR 490, 19 December 2007; Privacy NSW, Submission PR 468, 14 December 2007; Microsoft Asia Pacific, Submission PR 463, 12 December 2007; Youthlaw, Submission PR 390, 6 December 2007.

[89]Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Submission PR 548, 26 December 2007.

[90]Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 499, 20 December 2007.

[91]Australian Law Reform Commission, Review of Australian Privacy Law, DP 72 (2007), [59.111].

[92]Ibid, Proposal 59–2.

[93]Ibid, Proposal 59–3.

[94]Ibid, Proposal 59–4.

[95]Law Society of New South Wales, Submission PR 443, 10 December 2007.

[96] Australian Bankers’ Association Inc, Submission PR 567, 11 February 2008; Australian Privacy Foundation, Submission PR 553, 2 January 2008; Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Submission PR 548, 26 December 2007; Australian Direct Marketing Association, Submission PR 543, 21 December 2007; Optus, Submission PR 532, 21 December 2007; Australian Communications and Media Authority, Submission PR 522, 21 December 2007; Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 499, 20 December 2007; ACT Government Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services, Submission PR 495, 19 December 2007; Office of the Victorian Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 493, 19 December 2007; National Children’s and Youth Law Centre, Submission PR 491, 19 December 2007; Queensland Government, Submission PR 490, 19 December 2007; Privacy NSW, Submission PR 468, 14 December 2007; Microsoft Asia Pacific, Submission PR 463, 12 December 2007; ASTRA, Submission PR 426, 7 December 2007; Australasian Compliance Institute, Submission PR 419, 7 December 2007; P Youngman, Submission PR 394, 7 December 2007; Youthlaw, Submission PR 390, 6 December 2007; Youth Affairs Council of Victoria Inc, Submission PR 388, 6 December 2007

[97] Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Submission PR 499, 20 December 2007.

[98] Medicare Australia, Submission PR 534, 21 December 2007.

[99] Australasian Compliance Institute, Submission PR 419, 7 December 2007. See also Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department, Submission PR 546, 24 December 2007; Privacy NSW, Submission PR 468, 14 December 2007.

[100] Australian Communications and Media Authority, Submission PR 522, 21 December 2007.