News Corp, ZD Net, Fairfax Media and others may be interested to learn that the Australian Digital Health Agency has called them out for their allegedly inaccurate reporting on My Health Record in a document to parliament.
Under the topic subject of “Inaccurate reporting”, the ADHA has provided an answer to a question on notice to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee, claiming it has had to intervene to correct inaccurate reporting on My Health Record by media organisations on a number of occasions.
Questioning at Senate Estimates yesterday once again – as it did at the September 20 inquiry hearing – turned to the ADHA’s behavior towards journalists, and the CEO’s blustery answers allowed me to unearth the response from the ADHA to a question on notice from the hearing.
According to the ADHA, the question was:
Mr Kelsey: We have been active in ensuring that, where misunderstandings or inaccurate reporting has taken place—and that's not about trying to diminish the dialogue—
Senator SINGH: So you have then?
Mr Kelsey: We have been in touch with journalists where things have been misunderstood.
Senator SINGH: Can you provide some examples? What were those factual objections to the reporting?
Mr Kelsey: Yes. I'm very happy to take that on notice, if that is all right. I can't immediately give you that, but we can certainly provide you on notice with examples where we have sought correction of misunderstandings or inaccuracies in reporter coverage.
But the question was actually this, according to Hansard:
Senator SINGH: Mr Kelsey, in July you penned a long letter criticising the reporting of News Corp's Sue Dunlevy. That letter was published on the ADHA website but was later taken down. Why was that?
Mr Kelsey: Ms Dunlevy reported inaccurately a number of issues in relation to the My Health record. One of the responsibilities that the agency has and has had during this process is to ensure that people are informed accurately of the way in which the My Health record functions. We have been in touch with News Corp over the previous couple of years and have had a series of corrections published in relation to articles that have been published by Ms Dunlevy. On this occasion we published the facts in relation to the article she published on I think 14 July. We then had a letter from News Corp raising—
Senator SINGH: Yes, I know all that. I'm asking why you took it off the website.
Mr Kelsey: In response to the letter from News Corp, we then in good faith took down the statement that we had put up there. We then sought legal advice and subsequently wrote to News Corp to clarify that the statementwas accurate and that we have subsequently built the points that were in that statement into other parts of the frequently asked questions part of our website.
Senator SINGH: Have you sought any other journalist change or removed any critical coverage, directly or indirectly?
Mr Kelsey: No. We welcome the debate that has been going on in Australia. We think it's incredibly important.
Senator SINGH: So that was no?
Mr Kelsey: We have been active in ensuring that, where misunderstandings or inaccurate reporting has taken place—and that's not about trying to diminish the dialogue—
Senator SINGH: So you have then?
Mr Kelsey: We have been in touch with journalists where things have been misunderstood.
Senator SINGH: Can you provide some examples? What were those factual objections to the reporting?
Mr Kelsey: Yes. I'm very happy to take that on notice, if that is all right. I can't immediately give you that, but we can certainly provide you on notice with examples where we have sought correction of misunderstandings or inaccuracies in reporter coverage.
This was the ADHA’s answer:
“The Australian Digital Health Agency (Agency) has been engaged in the important national conversation around My Health Record — its benefits, privacy controls and security protections, and consumers’ right to opt out of the system. As the system operator responsible for the expansion of this system, the Agency welcomes this discussion, acknowledges and supports the freedom of the press to participate too. The Agency appreciates media enquiries that will result in sharing accurate information with the general public.
“The Agency’s objective is to ensure Australians are able to make an informed choice on how they control and interact with their healthcare information. It is the role of the Agency to ensure the general public is provided with accurate information to be able to make informed decisions, noting that misinformation may generate unnecessary fear and uncertainty in the wider community.
“When articles have been published containing factually inaccurate information, the Agency has sought to provide the correct information to the relevant journalist in an attempt to ensure no misinformation exists in the community.
“Some examples of articles the Agency chose to seek corrections to, are as follows:
- 1. Southern Cross Sunshine Coast reported ‘strangers will soon be able to access every Queenslander’s personal medical information’. The Agency requested a correction and provided information about the requirements for healthcare providers to be able to access the system.
- 2. News.com.au reported that the My Health Record website crashed. The Agency clarified that the website was functioning normally and provided further information helpful for consumers wishing to opt out.
- 3. ZDNet reported incorrect information prior to the opt out period, including quoting the Agency on predicted opt out statistics. The Agency requested corrections by providing alternate lines to clarify the misinformation.
- 4. The Sydney Morning Herald reported incorrectly that genomic DNA sequencing data could be uploaded into a person’s My Health Record.
- 5. KidSpot reported that violent partners could use My Health Record to find their separated partner – the Agency provided additional information for KidSpot to share with venerable readers (sic).
- 6. In 2017 the Sunday Telegraph reported that ‘Every last intimate aspect of your health will be available on the internet as of next year’. The Agency requested a correction and provided detailed information about the system.”
And that’s just the examples the ADHA provided.
It is well known in the sector that journalists who have reported on concerns about My Health Record have at times been the recipients of sizzling dispatches from the ADHA, including some eye opening interventions, even in cases of entirely accurate reporting. One journalist has left their job as a result, which is a loss to the sector.
As another example, News Corps’ Sue Dunleavy was slammed for her reporting on My Health Record in an extraordinary statement that was posted on the ADHA’s site – an APS publication no less – that has since been taken down. And she has rebutted criticism of her reporting made by Tim Kelsey in the September 20 hearing, asking for the record to be corrected.
The concerns unearthed by journalists have been worthwhile on behalf of domestic violence victims, etc. But rather than seeing that there are legitimate issues with the platform and choosing to take this as an opportunity to say, ‘We care and will fix them’, the ADHA has instead chosen to spend time brawling with reporters.
All very Trumpian.
David.
David.
20 comments:
The fact the ADHA takes inaccurate reporting seriously is good news. Based on this standard I am sure they have instructed Parlimentary Services to amend their publication that resulted in previous amendments to now reflect the fact the ADHA and the Minister lies about a policy being in place to prevent police accessing the My Health Record. Through a freedom of information request this is now on public record as being non existent.
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/procedure_for_release_of_myhealt
In case you missed it, this is Sue Dunlevy's response to evidence given by ADHA to the Senate Inquiry
Correspondence clarifying statements made at Canberra public hearing on 20 September 2018, received from Ms Sue Dunlevy, 4 October 2018 (PDF 63KB)
https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/clac_ctte/My_Health_Record_system/Dunlevy%204%20October.pdf?la=en
They also seem to now have discovered that police have intact requested data from the My health record. Either this is another attempt to mislead or they cannot manage their own record keeping. Hardly an endorsement for managing the populations records.
This whole fiasco does appear to be getting out of hand. As someone asked a few weeks ago, why the lying and bullying? This could have gone so much smoother. Tim Kelsey is proving to be reckless liability.
What happened? The senators were either highly unprepared (unlikely given the recent inquiries) or unwilling to lay a hand on Kelsey and Co?
Is there more bullying and game-playing going on behind the scenes?
Is it financial corruption, in terms of the billions of dollars being funnelled into MyHR, certain agency staff and all those medical "leads" and "advisers"?
Or some as-yet unseen (by us) imperative that overrules all the concerns and complaints because "the guvmint" will benefit in the long run?
I have to say it is not longer possible to see the clowns for the motley fools these days.
I watched the proceedings, and have to say it was all very odd. The ADHA was scheduled to appear at 12.30pm - but without explanation the time passed as the senators began to repeat questions they'd put to the Aged Care people, who put in a marathon near three-hour session.
Yes, Aged Care is worthy of close examination particularly at this time, but the senators certainly seemed to have run out of steam.
Then after lunch, the agency people still hadn't turned up and other outcome 1 questions were pushed around for some times until Kelsey's team finally arrived.
Instead of addressing the very pressing issues around the MyHR and its imminent commencement, senators seemed content to meander about on various side issues.
Kelsey said barely a word as a Health dept flack answered most of the questions for him. Very odd
Maybe Kelsey is no longer relevant and the real action is going on elsewhere?
What is it about this government and health experts?
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/health-experts-slam-government-s-contemptuous-ipcc-report-response-20181024-p50bki.html
They'd be wise to remember that nature abhors stupidity. Unless of course they are too stupid to even realise that.
It's becoming blindingly obvious that this Federal government hasn't a clue when it comes to health care - they don't do health care, they don't understand it but they act as though they do. In reality they are driven by right wing ideology.
@5:33PM, have been wondering when the Segway for the MyeHR to solve climate change would appear. Wonder what the carbon footprint is of all these health IT systems and apps really is? At least with paper records you are locking up carbon and it is recycled once disposed of.
The news now is that the NSW government is moving to lock down access to My Health Records for children in care due to "safety concerns". Media reporting has certainly been key in unearthing that flaw in the system.
https://www.healthcareit.com.au/article/exclusive-leaked-adha-document-shows-agency-grappling-my-health-record-concerns
So while the ADHA may angrily respond to the reporting, it is leading to actual efforts to protect vulnerable children.
No plans to pay GPs for uploading to My Health Record: Senate Estimates
https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsGP/Professional/No-plans-to-pay-GPs-for-uploading-to-My-Health-Rec
"The Federal Government does not plan to remunerate GPs for the time taken to upload health data to My Health Record."
"Chief Medical Adviser to the Australian Digital Health Agency, Professor Meredith Makeham, said that a great deal of work had gone into simplifying the upload process.
‘In the proprietary software most commonly used, it should take three to four clicks, 20–30 seconds. We’ve streamlined it as much as possible,’ she said."
Professor Meredith Makeham should read the AMA's guidelines for using the PCEHR/myhr, a 27 page document.
"AMA Guide to Medical Practitioners on the use of the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record System"
https://ama.com.au/sites/default/files/documents/AMA_Guide_to_using_the_PCEHR_Final_June_2012_Formatted_300812.pdf
IMHO, it's been so streamlined the content will be trivial and even more useless.
Where is that news coming from? The CIO of NSW Health sits on the ADHA board. You would assume NSW is behind the safe, secure, secret harvesting of the populations private data
The CIO of NSW Health sits on the ADHA board?? I can’t see him listed on the board page. I do note several come from the banking and finance sector which speaks volumes regarding the giving a shit about people and businesses. It maybe that with 5 communications teams Tim just can’t get websites updated. It also raises questions over the ADHA ability to manage information.
Each of the states and territories have one representative on the board's Jurisdictional Advisory committee, along with a rep from the Commonwealth Dept of Health...
Current committee memberships are here (jurisdictional committee is at the end)
https://digitalhealth.gov.au/about-the-agency/board-advisory-committees
This is how the committee is supposed to work
https://digitalhealth.gov.au/about-the-agency/board-advisory-committees/JAC%20Charter%20April%202018.pdf
So they should all be informed and up-to-date on ADHA activities, as well as providing advice on individual matters - such as differences between state and commonwealth health and privacy laws, their own health IT investment/development plans, and readiness of their public health sector facilities for adoption of the grand national scheme
Thanks, David, for going back and reminding us what the "bullying the media" was all about - in particular the News Corp journalist Sue Dunlevy, and also Bernard for pointing out that she requested the Senate record be corrected in relation to incorrect statements by Tim Kelsey.
Senator Singh seems to have raised concerns about another publication, Healthcare IT, which drew a complete blank from Kelsey, who promised to go back and "investigate".
Or at least that's what I think he said.... still waiting for the transcript to check. I'm sure we havent heard the last of all this!
BTW, Bernard, do you know when the letter was published, as I had not seen it on the website before you linked to it....
Here's the link again...
https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/clac_ctte/My_Health_Record_system/Dunlevy%204%20October.pdf?la=en
"The agency made a baseless attack on my integrity in a statement published on its website in
July. Through our lawyers I provided a comprehensive rebuttal of those claims. The agency then
withdrew that statement from its website.
"I would greatly appreciate it if the Senate record could be amended to reflect these facts.
Yours sincerely
Sue Dunlevy"
Anyone know if the Senate does intend correcting the record, and how would it go about that?
Are there any penalties for public servants who provide incorrect information to senate committees? The system seems predicated on the truth, so a public servant who misspoke should surely seek to correct the record and/or apologise once they realise. They can't use the platform to unfairly criticise Australian citizens, can they?
Well, Kelsey clearly feels it incumbent upon himself to "correct" any inaccuracies or misunderstandings.... so, naturally, he'll publicly correct himself if that is required.
Strikes me as a fair and honourable gentleman....
re: "Bernard, do you know when the letter was published, as I had not seen it on the website before you linked to it..."
Looking at the document properties, it was created on 18 October so my guess is that is the date it was put up on the Senate Inquiry's website.
Thanks, Bernard! So that's the day the inquiry ended, and the completed report was tabled in Parliament...
So by publishing the correspondence "late" - it was dated Oct 4 - no-one had a chance to respond in any way while the inquiry was still ongoing, and it's website publication was effectively "hidden" at a time when public attention turned to the report itself.
Interesting.
Post a Comment