View the feedback we have received on the NTC Discussion Paper - Government access to vehicle-generated data paper.

• Do our problem and opportunity statements accurately define the key problems to be addressed, and do they capture the breadth of problems that would need to be addressed?

  The overall problem and opportunity statement for use of vehicle data should be framed beyond road safety to include management of road congestion, and contribution to datasets that inform road mgt, user transport choices and environmental management

• Are there other major local or international jurisdictional developments providing further access powers or arrangements for vehicle-generated data?

  Major local vehicle data collecting entities will ride/car sharing companies, insurance companies Major international companies collecting vehicle data are the vehicle manufacturers who use this data for monitoring vehicles for a range of uses.

• Are there relevant international standards that should be adopted for vehicle-generated data? Are there any standards that could be locally developed?

  The ACS data sharing framework is being used by NSW government for as a tool for determining what data can be shared for a wide range of datasets and what level of aggregation is needed for a given sensitivity level.

• Can data other than for the purposes of road safety be exchanged on non-commercial terms?

  Yes.

• Does the NTC’s preferred approach (option 2) best address the problems we have identified? If not, what approach would better address these problems?

  Yes

• Does the NTC’s proposed approach best address the problems we have identified? If not, what approach would better address these problems?

  Please see other answers above

• Do you agree that road safety data should be considered the priority purpose for which we seek to exchange data with industry?

  Yes, but this focus should not close of broader data sharing of Transport data - e.g for urban planning etc

• Do you agree with our assumptions on the currently low uptake and limited availability of technology that supports the generation of vehicle data and that there are few and limited current government access arrangements for vehicle-generated data?

  Yes. Uber track approx 60,000 vehicles, go-get about 3000, NRMA are trialling Gofar technology with up to 1500 users Penetration is limited by update of cars with connecting technology and lack of coverage for connectivity

• Do you agree with the analysis presented in Table 7? What other opportunities are there for vehicle-generated data, and why?

  The table shows many use cases for vehicle-generated data. There are many broader use cases for which such data has use and which make sense for industry, other government jurisdictions etc that are not covered. e.g. urban planning

• Have priorities changed for land transport policy and for data access from vehicles with the onset of COVID-19?

  Yes, the need for remote and automated data collection became greater.

• Have we accurately described the key barriers to accessing vehicle-generated data? Are there additional barriers?

  We agree Option 2 gives the best chance for use case flexibility and also enables leveraging of industry for broader range of use cases, which will go further than the mandate of NTC, and will require coherence with broader data sharing principles.

• Is there value in establishing a national data aggregator or trust broker? Could good data definitions, practices and cooperation between entities achieve the same outcome?

  There is value in establishing trust frameworks, that enable aggregators and data brokers - public or private to operate. Good definitions and practices is needed to understand where/what data is held under what conditions and with whom it is shared.

• In our table, have we accurately captured all the regulatory and legislative mechanisms government could currently use to access vehicle-generated data?

  There are other state-based methods and mechanisms available for accessing vehicle-generated data under differing data-sharing models between industry vehicle data collecting entities and government e.g. nrma, uber and go-get with state governments.

• Should road safety be adopted as the priority for developing use cases for government use of vehicle-generated data? If not, what other approach should Australia take?

  Yes, but not with a data-sharing framework that is limited to transport data.

• We contend that a prioritised starting point should be established from which data for other purposes can be further developed. Are there other approaches that could achieve this?

  Ensuring that the baseline privacy, security and trust principles that underpin the priority areas do not limit expansion to broader transport use cases, private/public data sharing and cross-sectoral data-sharing e.g. for tourism.

• What are the key data needs of transport agencies beyond those already identified?

  Additional datasets of value include: where people work in relation to their jobs, usage of transport hubs for freight, public transport hubs, city planning

• What further benefits from vehicle-generated data should be considered?

  Management of environmental exhaust, vehicle roadworthiness, commuter transport planning

• What issues do you believe will be created if ExVe is adopted and that would need to be considered in Australia?

  The ExVe may be able to deal with mandated data flows but is likely to be insufficient for broader data sharing - such as for industry/government congestion services, ride-sharing and mobility management.