Jocelynne, interesting article, however I think you may need to research your subject material a little closer.

I manage a 'church-run, church-backed and church-controlled' (as you put it) agency in a rural city. (Anglican Church, and no, I'm not Anglican) The various programs we run deal everyday with confidential, personal information, entrusted to us by our clients. (Most of whom are young people, and most of who have little or no interest in any Christian church)

My staff have very specific rules and guidelines on how this information is obtained, used and stored. If you believe that 'the church' has access to this information in any way, I'm sorry, but you are mistaken. If a minister, bishop, the Pope (okay, he's Catholic...) or indeed any member of any Anglican congregation wanted access to information on my clients, they would have no more access than anyone else who walked in off the street.

I'm also concerned about this comment...

'the churches, keen for income and profits as, it appears, is standard form, came in at a rush.'

Could you for a second, even entertain the thought that the churches see helping the poor, the under-privileged, the unemployed as a social obligation and responsibility, rather than a profit making venture?

This good article, plus comments from some like "Sells", convinces me that it is high time for atheists and agnostics to form their own movement, to counter the inroads of church into politics. Sells and others suggest that churches are more honest than business. Really ? Remember the scandal over the Vatican Bank ? remember the generations of child abusers protected by religious hierarchies in spite of protests from numerous victims ? what about the current shenanigans of the Exclusive Brethren ? Did Sells come down in the last shower or what ? why are religions of all hues so obsessed by sexuality and reproduction/ abortion/ homosexuality that they have forgotten to oppose unjust war and to promote peace and love ? Please Jocelynne lead us into a humanistic and non-religious future with no hypocritical cant.

Kang writes 'convinces me that it is high time for atheists and agnostics to form their own movement, to counter the inroads of church into politics.' Please open your eyes to the fact that many or most of our universities and other government organisations were hijacked by agnostics/athiest decades ago.The point is that they failed miserably which has led for those honest enough to turn to those who can make things work. Organisations that run without any ethical values are bound to produce the results that our public schools churn out today. That is why many of the agnostics/athiest insist on sending their kids to religous schools. Can't argue with results!

thanks for the article jocelynne.

I would be truly unhappy if the Anglican dioscese of Sydney or the Catholic Church or an Islamic organisation could keep all my details for 5 or so years.

BradA is niaive to think there is any assurance of privacy of information when its decentralised out to a myriad of welfare organisations. How can you be sure that a casualised workforce in the "employment industry" won't keep copies of records for their own gain? I am amazed at how many begging letters I get from charities whom I don't contribute to, in a 3 week perion in May it was 75 letters. How do these charities get your address, I no longer leave my address on raffle tickets and have told the bank not to onsell my address.

Jocelynn is right to point out that outsourced Commonwealth Employment Service functions have become successful money making enterprises for families of politicians on both sides of politics.

A most interesting article: There is no evidence that religion and religious people are more honest and moral then any other group. A point well made in Richard Dawkins book “The God Delusion.” In fact there are many areas such as childcare where religious institutions have been guilty of criminal activity. Who can assure us that the churches are now up to standard, and like Cesar’s Wife beyond reproach!

Let us assume that if two individuals with religious association “a” and “b,” are assigned to the religious body “A” of which “a” is a member. What is the betting that “a” will get preference over “b?”

That it is a church contracting is probably the least of anyone's worries.

If the community was really aware of the variety of contractors who have access to their information over time they would be really concerned. Then there is the sub-contracting by contractors to consider. Usually the only assurance that the confidentiality of client data would be maintained is an agreement to this effect. Audits are rare and where performed are done by (you guessed it!) contractors and they know who signs the cheque, so they are not going to embarrass their public sector senior manager.

If anything, the outsourcing of former public service responsibilities is recognition that the senior managers in the public service are less than competent or efficient. Yet so often the same senior managers are required to select and manage the private contractors. Then there are the 'partnership' links between various contractors and crossovers of function and interest.

All things being considered the Salvos might seem a 'safer' proposition than some of the global entrepreneurs and their sub-contractors who have much better access to data collected by government and a much higher turnover of staff.