CHAIR—I welcome to the table officers from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—Mr Harper, did you have a happy census?

Talk
Mr Harper—We did have a very happy census, and we would like to thank the people of Australia for their cooperation.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—Very good. Are you in a position to give us an indication of compliance with the census at this stage, or is too early?

Talk
Dr Tam—Yes, I can give you an indication of compliance. We had a very high degree of cooperation. I think at this stage there are roughly15,000 people who have not yet complied with filling in a census form, and we are still working with the non-respondents to get their cooperation and to get them to fill in a census form.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—That is 15,000 out of how—

Talk
Dr Tam—20.5 million.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—That is not too shabby at all. Congratulations.

Talk
CHAIR—Better than the AEC does.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—Better than the AEC. I guess the census is one of the few things that the government compulsorily requires, along with filling out your tax returns and voting. Would you agree, Mr Harper, that the success of the census depends on the ABS maintaining not only the trust of the public but also their goodwill?

Talk
Mr Harper—Certainly. We rely on the goodwill of the population.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—Perhaps that goodwill is even more important than the ABS’s powers of compulsion or fining?

Talk
Mr Harper—Yes, that is the case. In fact, we collect the census form without necessarily resorting to our powers of compulsion. It is only in the residual cases that Dr Tam mentioned that we invoke those powers of compulsion.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—So you are pretty happy with the goodwill you have on the whole?

Talk
Mr Harper—It is very good.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—I would like to put a scenario to you which I think might inadvertently be undermining the goodwill that the ABS has with the census. As you well know, the census occurred not that long ago—on 8 August. Less than a month after that a member of the public—I am sure they were not the only one—received a letter headed, ‘Dear Resident,’ about the ‘census post-enumeration survey’. The first thought of the person who received this letter was, ‘Hang on a tick. I’ve already filled out the census. Why am I being asked to do this again?’ The letter states the survey will provide information ‘to assist the ABS to produce better quality estimates’ of the Australian population et cetera. When you read the purpose of the post-enumeration survey given in the letter received by the member of the public, you note it sounds very similar to that of the census itself, so there was some confusion in the case of the particular individual who received it. I think that the title ‘census post-enumeration survey’ is not necessarily the most punter friendly or most illuminating phrase.

The person who received this letter had a fairly busy week. Within a number of days they received—literally shoved under their door—a flyer which, unlike the original letter, was not personally addressed. It was again headed ‘census post-enumeration survey’ and in bold were the words: ‘Is the survey compulsory?’ It refers to the act. It says this act ‘authorises the ABS to ask the questions included in’ the census post-enumeration survey. At this time ‘you are being requested to answer the questions’ but if the Australian Statistician ‘directs you in writing to provide the information you are legally obliged to do so’. Within a month of the census, within days of receiving the request for the census post-enumeration survey, someone who had a fairly cooperative point of view received what seemed a fairly heavy-handed sort of letter, so the recipient was further taken aback.

The final part of this particular story is that an ABS official turned up unannounced—without an appointment—at 8.30 pm on a Friday. As a politician, I know people are not exactly thrilled when I am door-knocking, as I do sometimes, and I knock on their doors in the middle of the day. I can imagine how well an ABS official on a Friday night at 8.30 was received. I would be interested in your comments on that particular scenario and how it unfolded.

Talk
Mr Harper—I will make a few general comments and then hand over to my colleagues, who might be able to provide some more details. The first comment I would make is that the census is a very expensive exercise. We want to get the highest quality result out of the census as a result of the taxpayers’ funds that go into it. The post-enumeration survey, which approaches a very small proportion of the population, is an essential element for quality-assuring those census results.

It may be that we could improve the communication we have with the people who are selected in that survey. We will certainly look into that. But it is important that we run a high-quality PES in order to quality-assure the census itself. We need to do that very quickly after the census because the PES asks questions about the census and obviously the longer we leave it the more the chances are that people will forget what they happened to do with regard to the census form.

In terms of the statement about the compulsion of the survey, that is a fairly standard ABS statement where we request cooperation, but we have power to direct, if the Statistician chooses to do so. That is because we always get the question, ‘Is this compulsory?’ We have come up with that form of words in order to let people know where we stand legally. As far as the particular operations of the PES is concerned, Ms Dunlop, do you want add anything further to that?

Talk
Ms Dunlop—It is usual practice for us to have a primary approach letter, something that lets the person who has been selected in the survey know about the survey and that in this case we would be calling to interview them and the purpose and the importance of what we are about. That would be normal. I guess the time at which the interviewer calls—I cannot comment on the specific case but usually do try and call at a time when we can find people at home. I do not know whether they made earlier calls or not and were not able to make contact. We basically try to get a time which is suitable to respondent to conduct the interview. If we come at an inappropriate time for the respondent we would normally try to set a more appropriate time.

Talk
Senator FIFIELD—Could I perhaps ask that the ABS does have a look at seeing if there is a more friendly sensitive way of conducting the post enumeration survey. I am not being critical of the substance of the exercise, it is more the form and the style. I only raise it to help the ABS maintain the good will of the public and to assist in voluntary compliance. If I could leave that with you. Congratulations on conducting a fantastic census, that is a great compliance result that you have. This might be an opportunity where it could be a little more sensitive, a little less heavy-handed, but still get the same result.

Talk
Mr Harper—Thank you for your comments. We take those comments very seriously. While I think we run very good both household and business surveys in the ABS, certainly as well as any other country in the world does, there are always area