The Claim
“Proposed scrapping the census.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim that the Abbott government "proposed scrapping the census" is factually accurate but requires significant context. In February 2015, media reports confirmed that the government was considering abandoning the 2016 Australian census and replacing it with a smaller sample survey [1][2].
However, crucial context emerged shortly after the initial reports: the proposal to axe the census originated from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) itself, not directly from the Abbott government [3]. The ABS, facing severe budget constraints and aging technology systems (some up to 30 years old), proposed releasing itself from the obligation to conduct the 2016 census as a way to fund a critical technology upgrade [4].
The 2011 census had cost $440 million, and the 2016 census was expected to be more expensive due to IT requirements for electronic lodgement [1]. The ABS requested the change because it lacked funds to both conduct the census and modernize its deteriorating systems [4].
Most importantly, the census was never actually scrapped. By May 2015, the government confirmed the 2016 census would proceed as planned, and the ABS received a $250 million funding boost for technology upgrades [4][5]. The census was conducted successfully on August 9, 2016 [6].
Missing Context
The claim omits several critical facts:
The proposal came from the ABS, not the government: The Australian Bureau of Statistics itself requested exemption from conducting the 2016 census to fund technology upgrades [3][4]. This was not a government initiative to eliminate the census.
The census was ultimately retained: The 2016 census proceeded as scheduled with increased funding. There was no actual abolition of the census [4][5].
Previous governments considered the same: Documents released under the Archives Act show both the Fraser (Coalition) and Keating (Labor) governments had previously considered axing the census to save money [1]. This was not a unique Coalition proposal.
International context: Britain's Conservative government had announced plans to axe its census in 2010 (later reneged), and Canada had cancelled its compulsory census in 2010 [1]. The consideration was part of broader international debate about modernizing data collection methods.
The ABS's technology crisis: The Bureau had 500 separate computer systems, one-third of which were unreliable, and one-sixth so outdated they were no longer vendor-supported [4]. The previous Labor government had cut $45 million from the ABS, contributing to the infrastructure crisis [4].
Source Credibility Assessment
The original source is the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), one of Australia's oldest and most reputable newspapers (founded 1831, owned by Nine Entertainment) [7]. According to Media Bias/Fact Check, SMH is rated as center-left with high factual reporting standards [7]. The article was written by Peter Martin, a former Commonwealth Treasury official and economics editor, lending it significant credibility [1]. The reporting was factual and based on confirmed government consultations.
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Search conducted: "Fraser Keating government considered axing census Australia"
Finding: Both previous Coalition (Fraser) and Labor (Keating) governments had considered axing the census to save money [1]. Documents released under the Archives Act confirmed both administrations examined this option.
Additionally, the Labor government (2007-2013) cut $45 million from the ABS budget, contributing to the technology infrastructure crisis that led the ABS to propose skipping the 2016 census [4]. When the Coalition took office, they inherited an ABS with deteriorating systems and insufficient funding to both conduct the census and modernize its technology.
The Labor opposition in 2015 was unwilling to guarantee Senate support for legislative changes to the Census and Statistics Act, which may have influenced the government's decision to retain the census [4].
Balanced Perspective
While critics portrayed the consideration as an attack on evidence-based policy [2], the full story reveals a more nuanced situation:
The ABS faced a genuine dilemma: conduct the expensive 2016 census with failing technology, or skip one census cycle to fund infrastructure that would improve data quality for decades. The Bureau itself made the proposal to the government's expenditure review committee [3][4].
The Coalition government's ultimate decision—to retain the census AND invest $250 million in ABS technology—resolved the issue [4]. This represented the largest technology upgrade in the Bureau's 110-year history [4].
Comparatively, this episode is consistent with broader patterns: both major parties have considered census changes when facing budget pressures, and both have made funding decisions affecting the ABS's capabilities. The Labor government's $45 million in cuts helped create the crisis, while the Coalition's $250 million investment resolved it.
Key context: The consideration was brief (February to May 2015), the proposal originated from the statistical agency itself, and the outcome was increased investment in the ABS rather than census abolition. The claim that the government "proposed scrapping the census" overstates what was ultimately a budget negotiation that resulted in preservation and expansion of the statistical infrastructure.
PARTIALLY TRUE
5.0
out of 10
The claim is technically accurate—the Abbott government did consider scrapping the 2016 census in early 2015. However, the framing is misleading because: (1) the proposal originated from the ABS itself, not the government; (2) the census was never actually abolished; (3) the government ultimately invested $250 million to preserve the census AND modernize the Bureau; and (4) previous Labor and Coalition governments had considered similar moves. The claim presents a brief consideration that resulted in rejection as if it were a serious government proposal.
Final Score
5.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The claim is technically accurate—the Abbott government did consider scrapping the 2016 census in early 2015. However, the framing is misleading because: (1) the proposal originated from the ABS itself, not the government; (2) the census was never actually abolished; (3) the government ultimately invested $250 million to preserve the census AND modernize the Bureau; and (4) previous Labor and Coalition governments had considered similar moves. The claim presents a brief consideration that resulted in rejection as if it were a serious government proposal.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (7)
-
1
Abbott government considers axing the Australian census to save money
The Abbott government is considering abandoning the Australian census and replacing it with a smaller sample survey in the upcoming budget.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
2
Census scrapping not worth the money it would save, demographers warn
Sarah Ferguson presents Australia's premier daily current affairs program, delivering agenda-setting public affairs journalism and interviews that hold the powerful to account. Plus political analysis from Laura Tingle.
Abc Net -
3
ABS is behind controversial proposal to axe the 2016 census, not the Abbott government
The controversial proposal to axe the 2016 census has originated from the Bureau of Statistics rather than the Abbott government, the bureau has revealed.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
4
Federal budget 2015: Census saved, $250m investment in Bureau of Statistics
The census has been saved and the Australian Bureau of Statistics will get a $250 million funding boost as part of the biggest technology upgrade in its 110-year history.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
5
Census 2016 on track after $250 million funding boost to Australian Bureau of Statistics
Treasurer Joe Hockey puts to rest reports the Federal Government was considering axing the 2016 census, with the Australian Bureau of Statistics receiving a $250 million budget boost.
Abc Net -
6
2016 Australian census
Wikipedia
-
7
The Sydney Morning Herald - Bias and Credibility
LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording
Media Bias/Fact Check
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.