CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS

Ms LE (Fowler) (09:30): In recent weeks, I have received a wave of messages from constituents regarding the census. They are very upset and angry that they being required to fill the census out. People are asking: 'Why does the government need all this information about me and my family?

I'm disappointed that you are encouraging our data to be unsafely collected by the government.' I want to acknowledge those concerns honestly because they are real and are widespread. The census, at its core, is important. If we want fair funding for Western Sydney, and if we want accurate numbers for aged care, the NDIS, transport and local infrastructure, we need good data.

Without it, our communities miss out. But people are not imagining their distrust. Over many years, governments of all stripes have made decisions about data and privacy that have chipped away at public confidence.

We have seen systems fail, data breaches, shifting explanations about how information will be linked or shared, and constant changes to what is collected and why. Each time that happens, it sends a message to the public: your information is not really in your control. For many migrants, refugees, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and communities who are already feeling they're overpoliced or under-served, this fear is even sharper.

When government knocks on their door asking for more details, it doesn't feel like planning and services. It can feel like surveillance. When people don't see benefits flowing back into their neighbourhoods but they do see more forms, more questions and more targeted compliance, they naturally ask, 'Why should I trust you with my data?' The tragedy is that, by mishandling people's trust, governments have now made even essential tools like the census a target of anger and suspicion.

Instead of arguing about how to use the data to fix overcrowded classrooms or long hospital waiting lists, we are arguing about whether to fill out the form at all. When trust collapses, good policy instruments become collateral damage. So we have to hold two truths at the same time.

First, the census is important. It is one of the few ways communities like mine can prove we exist in the numbers—we know we do, so we can demand our fair share. Second, trust is not automatic.

It is earned by how government behaves through being transparent about what is collected, limiting it to what is necessary, clearly explaining how it will be used and putting real safeguards and penalties around misuse. My message to the government is this: if you want people to participate in the census, stop treating trust as a box-ticking exercise. Invest in genuine community engagement, in language appropriate communication, in independent oversight of data use and in strong privacy protections that are explained in plain English.

Show people, don't just tell them, that the information will not be used against them.