back to article Transport for New South Wales told to stop tracking oldies, students

The public transport authority in the Australian State of New South Wales has been told to limit the amount of data it collects with its stored value "Opal card", after a decision released by the state's Civil and Administrative Tribunal in February 2018. The case was brought by Nigel Waters, who complained that Transport for …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Holmes

    as it should be

    Just because something connects to the internet, or is electronic, as in data card readers or is used for management purposes does not give permission for the organization, company or person behind them to use the data for those individual other purposes.

    If the/a government wants to use electronic fare system it does not have right to track citizens with it. only later if the individual 'is found to be acting criminally' should they then seek to identify a user.

    The Australian Federal Gov has a MyGov portal/website that other State Governments could use to provide permission from users to use their data, Opal itself has a website that it could have used to permit monitoring.

    In fact many users use a loop-hole to get free travel, if funds are insufficient they get a

    "low funds warning"

    and the card is not debited, they just never refill or replenish the card.

    So as long as this situation exists pensioners and students could have had a normal card with insufficient funds on it and travelled unmonitored.

    All the Government need to do is debit the card to zero, and fail any further usage until funds are replenished,

    The Transport department of NSW government actually advertises over the intercom at rail stations trying to encourage people to register, this would enable them to harass a traveller when fund are low and overcome the problem, they use the claim that funds are guaranteed if they loose their card, but the people they want to attract don't have much on their opal cards anyway.

    1. Diogenes

      Re: as it should be

      All the Government need to do is debit the card to zero, and fail any further usage until funds are replenished,

      I've seen a bus driver punched because a traveller objected to being refused entry because of no funds on a card. I've seen ticket inspectors spat on due to insufficient funds on the cards.

      The gold & student cards are registered so that a name comes up & that name can be checked against the concession card.

      If the old git who complained wanted to, he could have not accepted the T&Cs foregone the gold card and its $2.50 a maximum daily cap & paid full fare , or obtained an anonymous single use concession ticket (which doesn't have the cap)

      1. Scoular

        Re: as it should be

        Surely one or a few people behaving badly is not justification for an agency to collect personal data on a class of users most of whom do not behave badly. Particularly when it does not require the same information on all users.

        Perhaps the government should lock up all footballers because some of them behave badly enough to get locked up too? Seems to lack a little fairness to me.

      2. eldakka

        Re: as it should be

        > If the old git who complained wanted to, he could have not accepted the T&Cs foregone the gold card

        As per the article:

        The decision also said that consent can't be forced. “Take it or leave it” provisions that are “something more akin to a lack of choice” don't count as consent.

        Therefore accepting the T&Cs that are of the "take it or leave it" style does not in fact count as "consent".

      3. Graham Cobb Silver badge

        Re: as it should be

        The gold & student cards are registered so that a name comes up & that name can be checked against the concession card.

        Why should that be? I can see that the ticket inspector might ask for evidence that the person is eligible for the concession (just like they might when inspecting a single use concession ticket) but what has a name got to do with it?

        Particularly as non-concession cards do not need names (so a restriction on transferability can't be the issue).

  2. frank ly

    How surprising

    "In an internal review related in the decision, TfNSW gave itself the all-clear, claiming there was no breach of the state's Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act."

    My internal reviews always give me the all-clear.

  3. VerySlowData
    Angel

    down here in Mexico

    south of the border in Vic., if you have a concession card, you are required to show the evidence that you are entitled to it; e.g., for a Seniors Myki card (the 'S' card) you have to show a valid seniors card issued by the state government.

    1. Adam 1

      Re: down here in Mexico

      Different issue. The same applies in NSW. If you are traveling on a concession fare, you are required to show your proof of entitlement to do so (that'd be your senior/student/whatever) to anyone authorised to validate your ticket (that'd be the inspectors/bus drivers/fare collectors/gate staff). This case doesn't change that, nor was that being challenged.

      What was being challenged was the ability for a concession holder to travel on a card that is not linked to their personal identity in some big data hoover.

  4. OffBeatMammal

    I presume if I pay by credit card, or sign up on the Opal site and register my card (so I can cancel it if it gets lost/stolen) the same will apply and they won't try to de-anonymize me? Not that I really care, I only ever use it from the airport to the office and back again!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like