Chapter 1 Higher Education Support Amendment (Maximum Payment Amounts and
Other Measures) Bill 2012
1.1
On 13 September 2012, the House of Representatives Selection Committee
referred the Higher Education Support Amendment (Maximum Payment Amounts and
Other Measures) Bill 2012 for inquiry and report.
1.2
The Bill was introduced to the House of Representatives on
12 September 2012.
1.3
The inquiry was announced by media release on 14 September 2012 and
received six submissions. A list of submissions is at Appendix A.
The Bill
1.4
The Bill consists of three schedules. Schedules 1 and 2 adjust funding
for Other Grants and Commonwealth scholarships respectively. Schedule 3
proposes amendments to the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (HESA)
relating to the use and disclosure of information collected under the Act.
1.5
In referring the Bill, the Selection Committee provided the principal
issue for consideration as the:
substantial… expan[sion of] the scope of the information
sharing that the department is allowed to engage in [and p]ossible implications
on both the privacy and the red tape reduction…
1.6
Thus, the principal issue for referral of the Bill cited by the
Selection Committee refers exclusively to Schedule 3.
1.7
Schedule 3 of the Bill proposes to amend HESA to allow the disclosure
of information (including personal information) collected for the purposes of
the Act to:
- Tertiary Education
Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), for the purposes of the TEQSA Act;
- Australian Skills
Quality Authority for the purposes of the National Vocational Education and
Training Regulator Act;
- higher education and
vocational education and training providers, peak bodies,
- Tertiary Admissions
Centres and state and territory governments, for use in research relating to
the provision of higher education and vocational education and training,
including quality assurance and planning; and
- conduct Australian
Government funded surveys of staff, students and former students.[1]
1.8
The bill facilitates wider disclosure of HESA information while
requiring the disclosure be:
- to designated
organisations for permitted purposes;[2] and
- with the consent of
the provider.[3]
1.9
The Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary
Education (DIISRTE) stated:
The need to amend the Act has arisen because the Department
has received a high volume of requests from State and Territory governments and
other higher education stakeholders for student and staff data at the unit
record level …
TEQSA also requires unit record level data to fulfil its
functions under the TEQSA Act, or else it will need to establish a separate
data collection, placing additional burden on providers
…
The amendments address higher education providers’ concerns
regarding the burden associated with data provision and quality assurance…[4]
Stakeholders response
1.10
Of the four submissions received from industry stakeholders, three
supported the proposed measures in Schedule 3 and one expressed reservations at
these measures.
1.11
The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) acknowledged the ‘usefulness
of accurate and targeted data in the context of quality assurance and policy
planning…’[5] However, it expressed
concern that:
the objectives under this proposal for the disclosure of
personal information of staff and students are very broadly defined, and may be
accessed by a range of organisations for almost any purpose relating to
“improving the provision of higher education or vocational education and
training and for research relating to the provision of higher education and
training, including research relating to quality assurance or planning the
provision of higher education or vocational education and training… (Bill’s
Explanatory Memorandum, p. 5.)[6]
1.12
DIISRTE referred to requirements that ensure the confidentiality and
appropriate use of personal data in the:
Higher Education Data Protocols [that] govern the security
and storage of personal information which is disclosed under the Act. The
relevant provision of the Protocols provides that:
2.3.2 … approved users of Higher Education data
- comply at all times
with any security requirements notified by DIISRTE relating to Higher Education
data;
- store the Higher
Education data securely and protect the data from loss and unauthorised access;
- ensure that only
those people with a genuine need to view the data will have access to the data;
- only retain the data
while there is a genuine need to keep it, and then destroy the data;
- not engage in any
data-matching activities involving the data without the prior written consent
of DIISRTE;
- not attempt to
re-identify the data if it is provided in a de-identified or aggregated form;
- not provide the data
to any third parties without the prior written consent of DIISRTE; and
- not publish the data
(in any medium) without the prior written consent of DIISRTE
…
the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner [OAIC]
and Attorney-General's Department were satisfied with the Bill, based on the
inclusion of these significant safeguards surrounding privacy.[7]
1.13
The Privacy Commissioner confirmed that:
At various stages in the development process, the OAIC
advised the Department to give further consideration to issues surrounding the
use, disclosure and security of the personal information that is to be handled
under the proposed changes. The final draft of the Bill seems to reflect the
OAIC’s comments, and we have no cause to comment further on these proposed
amendments.[8]
1.14
The NTEU also raised concern at:
the stated intention to use personal information to “...to
construct accurate and robust survey sample frames to assess the quality of
teaching and learning.” (Bill’s Explanatory Memorandum, p. 5.). When viewed in
the context of a number of other proposals from DIISR[TE] and the regulatory
bodies, NTEU is concerned that privacy overrides proposed by this Bill will be
used to drill down to individual levels and include details of staff teaching
qualifications as a proxy for quality assessment.[9]
1.15
DIISRTE outlined its response to stakeholder concerns relating to
privacy (specifically raised by the National Union of Students) during
consultation on the Bill, which:
amended the relevant sections of the Protocols to read:
- 2.3.3 Individuals or groups wishing to register a
complaint regarding the use of Higher Education data should in the first
instance lodge that complaint with the data user concerned.
- 2.3.4 Users of Higher
Education data agree to address in an adequate and timely manner any complaints received in accordance with section
2.3.3 above.
- 2.3.5 If individuals or groups are unsatisfied with
the outcome of a complaint lodged with auser of Higher Education data as per section 2.3.3
above, they may raise the issue with DIISRTE.
- 2.3.6 Users of Higher Education data agree to
co-operate with DIISRTE to address complaints
received in accordance with section 2.3.5 above.
Under the Privacy Act, individuals who believe their personal
information has been mishandled also have the right to lodge a complaint with the
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC).[10]
1.16
The National Union of Students had ‘no concerns or feedback to provide
on the matter.’[11]
1.17
Universities Australia, the Australian Technology Network of
Universities and Innovation Research Universities all supported the proposed
measure and expressed their satisfaction that the regime of safeguards would
ensure the appropriate use of data.[12]
1.18
Universities Australia added:
Making the HEIMS [Higher
Education Information Management System] data available to the sector through a
centralised collection process will ensure that regulatory functions operate
within known parameters and that the reporting burden on universities,
particularly the duplication of effort, is kept to a minimum. Furthermore, data
will be able to be utilised in more proactive ways not currently possible, and
at more appropriate levels of granularity, leading to better public policy
outcomes through better provision and access to information.[13]
Committee comment and recommendation
1.19
The Committee supports the proposed improvement and facilitation of
efficient sharing of HESA data and is satisfied with the proposed measures to
ensure appropriate use of this data.
Recommendation 1 |
|
The Committee recommends that the House of Representatives
pass the Higher Education Support Amendment (Maximum Payment Amounts and
Other Measures) Bill 2012. |
Amanda Rishworth MP
Chair
4 October 2012