This Freedom Of Information Request Review was processed last week:
Technical design documents for data deletion from MHR including backups
Justin Warren made this Freedom of Information request to Australian Digital Health Agency
This is the link to the outcome.
And this is the link to the final decision letter.
The decision basically says that a November 2018 document which describes how Accenture will delete records will not be made publically available.
As Justin commented:
“ADHA can also use the provisions in the #FOI Act to redact information from the documents to remove sensitive information. They have instead chosen to exempt the whole thing, claiming "deliberative material" is interwoven in the technical.”
You can read all the gory details from the link above.
I really struggle to understand just why technical details of how a record will be deleted on the basis of a valid request can be in anyway secret or sensitive.
That the ADHA refuses to disclose only makes one wonder if they really can and will permanently and totally delete a person’s record.
Thanks Justin for the effort but many more of us would like to know the facts here.
And while sorting this FOI matter out the new Board could also release full statistics on the meaningful clinical use of the MyHealthRecord over the last year. That they have not makes one wonder if they are not very significant in the overall scheme of things. Also we want to see how moving to opt-out is changing the usage stats!
David.
Not sure the board can change ADHA. This is an example of entrenched leadership behaviour. The cancer will have spread through the ranks. Seems the last few years of internal snippets were as bad as they seemed. Not exactly a good reflection of a public ally funded organisation in charge of helping to shift health and well-being.
ReplyDeleteThe ASD is more transparent.
The Minister can though:
ReplyDeleteThis is from the legislation:
11 Health Minister may give directions to the Agency
(1) The Health Minister may give written directions to the Agency about the performance of its functions or the exercise of its powers.
(2) A direction given under subsection (1):
(a) must not relate to a particular individual; and
(b) must not be inconsistent with:
(i) the Act; or
(ii) this instrument; or
(iii) any other instrument made under the Act.
(3) The Health Minister must not give a direction under subsection (1) unless each State/Territory Health Minister agrees to the giving of the direction.
(4) The Agency must comply with a direction given under subsection (1).
(5) This section does not affect the application of section 22 of the Act (which deals with the application of government policy to corporate Commonwealth entities) in relation to the Agency.
(The Act means the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. The legislation is a rule under that act)
You have more chance getting Turnbull and Dutton on a date
ReplyDeleteIf you make a FOI request to the ADHA it will certainly be delayed and costed highly and not released. I don't think ADHA has ever said the standard words 'I have decided to grant you full access to the document.' Thats their culture.
ReplyDeleteThis series of interactions between the OAIC and the ADHA says it all https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/4930/response/13756/attach/9/FOIREQ1800179%20documents.pdf
particularly reference to a staff member leaving suddenly and unexpectedly - what an insight into the operating model and a confusing mess. This information was released by the OAIC, not the ADHA as part of this query https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/oaic_mr1800724_mr1800692_s_70_re#incoming-13756
If you want to FOI the myhealth record, make the same request to the health department they will almost certainly release it as there is a real difference in culture and attitude to FOI between the two organisations.
Wish we could bottle your optimism David, be worth gold.
ReplyDeleteAs long as Catherine King knows .....
ReplyDeleteWill not matter for while now, Feds are in caretaker mode. Well some are and some Agencies seem to have been unprepared as expected.
ReplyDeleteSeems Justin Warren FOI is exposing the ADHA. Seems they cannot product any design, test documents or traceable evidence regarding the delete function. Not sure about others but this seems rather concerning. What do these 400 people do?
ReplyDeleteADHA is a PR machine.
ReplyDeletePR as in the PRrrrring sound a fax machine makes?
ReplyDeleteBut in all honesty if ADHA is a PR machine it has not exactly demonstrated warranty.
AnonymousApril 15, 2019 10:40 PM
ReplyDeleteThat whole episode is just a national embarrassment, hopefully someone is on it and an in-depth story will emerge. Probably not good timing for the Health Minister, maybe the Katter Party could provide the Minister and the ADHA CEO a couple of those big old cowboy hats
I think you will find the Kelsey man thinks being obstructive is innovative
ReplyDeleteSomeone left an annotation that makes a lot of sense and really calls ADHA out. I really do not think they actually have any documentation either technical or in the form of a traceable change request
ReplyDeleteExtracted from Right-to-know
Nnnnnnn - left an annotation (April 17, 2019)
How is the request for architecture artefacts any different to all the technical specifications and conformance profiles published on the public domain covering more critical aspects of the digital health system and MHR?
The argument by ADHA seems flawed