Council biometric scanning plan slammed
September 8, 2011 – 11:35AMA digitial scanner used to collect fingerprints.
A union has slammed as an invasion of privacy a move by a local Melbourne council to introduce biometric scanning for library workers.
Under the plan, Monash City Council would require library staff to provide DNA samples in order to scan workers’ veins using pattern recognition technology when they clock on and off for a shift.
Australian Services Union (ASU) assistant branch secretary Igor Grattan says members have expressed concerns about the security of personal information and its storage.
He said swipe cards or PIN codes are preferable methods for workplace timekeeping or security purposes.
“It’s got to be easier than storing people’s personal information, especially when we don’t know what it all means in the long term,” Mr Grattan said. “You’ve just got to take a deep breath and think about people’s privacy.”
Mr Grattan said his members have been advised not to comply with the plan.
Victorian Privacy Commissioner Helen Versey said in a statement any organisation considering the introduction of biometric technology should conduct a thorough assessment of privacy implications.
“The collection of biometric data by the Victorian public sector, including local councils, is subject to the Victorian Information Privacy Act 2000 and organisations proposing to introduce such a system would be well advised to seek advice from my office,” Ms Versey said.
Comment is being sought from Monash City Council.
COMMENT:
It would be fascinating to know exactly how much and what kind of information councils collect about their residents – especially in Glen Eira. Rumours have continually cropped up that in this municipality a tight watch and dossier is kept on:
- individuals
- blog sites
- letters to the editor
- complaints
- correspondence
In addition, we wonder whether the following technologies are employed:
- reverse telephone directories which identify callers (even if they wish to remain anonymous)
- website tracking
- files on individuals (usually classified as ‘activists’)
All of the above can of course be explained away as enhancing ‘business processes’ such as improving customer service, improving website navigation, legal obligations, and so on. Wouldn’t it be terrific if residents knew exactly whether or not the above tactics were being employed and, more importantly, for what purpose? Now that would be real transparency and openness!
Glen Eira Debates 
September 13, 2011 at 5:32 PM
At the April c60 meeting one speaker refused to give her full name, preferring only to be called by her first name. As far as I can tell, there is no legal obligation for speakers at a public meeting to fully their names. Whatever the reasons this person had for acting as she did, her wishes should have been respected. Instead, the minutes published her full name. Council has never explained why this was done. It’s merely another example of how little this administration cares about what residents want and their inability to adhere to basic concepts of decency and privacy.
September 13, 2011 at 8:06 PM
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/people-s-mandate-for-a-global-resource-based-economy.html
http://inlite.ning.com/group/sausage-sizzle-solutions
http://www.controlledcrossings.com.au/
Your silence is nothing more than your obedient consent, speak up while you still can.
September 13, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Geez, it doesn’t take long for the lunatics to crawl out of the woodwork, does it? How about we stick to local issues.
September 13, 2011 at 8:37 PM
Statement from CEO
Thursday, 8 September 2011
Statement from Monash CEO, David Conran
RE: Vein Reader Technology
Monash City Council is moving from a paper-based staff rostering system to an electronic rostering/payroll system. What we are currently considering is the options available for staff to activate the new electronic system, be that by a PIN code or the latest technology such as vein readers.
No final decision has been made as to the options staff will have to activate the electronic system. We have been consulting with staff in our five public library branches and the union about the options available.
As part of the consultation with staff and the union, we have agreed that the utilisation of the vein reader would be voluntary for library staff. The vein reader technology would only be implemented if there is wide acceptance by staff.
At this stage, our consultation with staff has shown a largely positive response to the implementation of an electronic rostering system due to the fact that staff would no longer need to waste time manually completing time sheets and the flexibility it provides for those who wish to change shifts or work at multiple sites across the city.
There has also been a positive response from a number of staff regarding the vein reader technology. Similarly, there has been a number of staff who has expressed concerns. These concerns relate to the security of data and the personal nature of the technology. We understand their concerns and have appreciated their feedback.
We already hold a large amount of personal information about staff and we are well aware of our privacy obligations. We would not consider implementing any system where the security of confidential information could be compromised.
We are not the first local government in Victoria to consider implementing this technology as part of its electronic rostering system and it has also been used for many years in the private sector.
September 14, 2011 at 2:10 PM
They cut down a similar amount of trees in Princes Park in South Caulfield about 7 or 8 years ago. Drive past now and look at the result. It is a superb well used park. What would have happened if they had consulted the residents. They still would have cut the trees down and everyone would still be angry. The people that live nearby think they have some sort of personal attachment to the park that others do not have. The trees were old. Everything has a life. You will get used to it.
September 14, 2011 at 3:56 PM
It was this quote from Monash CEO David Conran that really caught my eye: “We would not consider implementing any system where the security of confidential information could be compromised”. Its obviously designed to be reassuring, yet remains codswallop. Security of confidential information is routinely breached around the world, by big and small companies, by governments, institutions, hospitals, councils, police, health workers. According to Ted Bailieu, “its of little consequence”. To be fair, he was referring to when its government that is doing the breaching.
Sony, Honda, Citigroup, RSA, Travelodge, NHS and MoD in UK…they’re just some recent examples. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in UK now has the power to impose fines of up to 500000 pounds (up from 5000 pounds) for “deliberate or negligent” breaches of personal data, but the incidents continue to mount. The sad fact remains that in many cases even where companies have strong policies and practices governing information protection, employees may not know, understand, or implement them. On top of that there can be “vindictive individuals” with privileged access, and people who specialize in phishing.
For those interested, many examples of data-related failures can be found by trawling through the collection at http://www.theregister.co.uk. Useful tags include “security breach”, “identify theft”, “public sector data protection”, “data security”, and “data breach”.