Eight staff fabricated location data on Indigenous communities while working for a company contracted by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) during last year’s failed voice referendum process, an investigation has found.
The AEC said it was now “considering its legal position” over the scandal and remained “incredibly disappointed” in the alleged behaviour of McNair yellowSquares, a market research firm engaged as part of the commission’s efforts to improve participation in the vote.
Earlier this year Guardian Australia revealed whistleblower claims that McNair, a frequent government contractor, had fabricated data purporting to show attitudes of Indigenous communities in regional Australia and suburban Adelaide during a project to test the effectiveness of AEC advertising.
The allegations were made by a long-term McNair research interviewer, who said he was repeatedly instructed to attach false location data to face-to-face interviews he had conducted in inner-city Sydney. He alleged the fabrications were designed to cut costs while presenting research that appeared to have been conducted across the country.
McNair was made aware of the whistleblower’s allegations by his lawyers at the Human Rights Law Centre in November last year. When the Guardian put questions to McNair in August it said it was taking the allegations seriously and then engaged external investigators to examine the allegations.
That investigation has now been concluded and shared with the AEC.
It found 13 McNair staff had been told to alter location data on survey responses, according to the AEC.
Eight McNair staff acceded to the request.
The AEC said the location of 156 research respondents, from a total of 6,999 respondents, was incorrectly recorded. It said the investigation had concluded that the directions came from a single “supervisor”.
The fallout from the Guardian’s reporting has already been significant.
The Finance Department suspended McNair from its panel of private suppliers of management advisory services and wrote to other departments alerting them to the allegations. It remains suspended, the department confirmed on Monday.
Separate investigations have been launched by two industry bodies, the Australian Data and Insights Association (Adia) and the Research Society. The Adia investigation, however, was forced to end when McNair resigned its membership, a move that “disappointed” the peak body.
In a statement, the AEC said it remained “incredibly disappointed” in McNair’s alleged conduct and continued to take the matter seriously.
The AEC stressed the results of the research were not compromised, because it had neither asked for nor required the surveys to be conducted across a range of locations.
McNair was one subcontractor engaged to help test the effectiveness of AEC advertising. That advertising was designed to improve understanding of the referendum process.
An AEC spokesperson said on Friday: “The AEC is considering its legal position. We will continue to do so as this matter evolves.”
McNair’s new managing director, Gillian Milne, said in a statement the company had “sought to maintain the highest standards of integrity and accountability throughout the investigation”.
“Changes have been immediately made in response to investigation findings, including training, system and process improvements,” Milne said.
“I look forward to moving the organisation forward decisively and with trust and confidence – delivering only the highest quality research services to our clients every day on every project.”
The Research Society’s investigation into the incident is continuing. Its enforcement options include expelling McNair from its corporate membership.
The society’s chief executive, Angus Hunter, said he could not discuss the detail around his body’s investigation. But he said the allegations were being taken seriously.
“We haven’t had a case like this [before],” Hunter said. “There’s a huge amount of market research that is done in Australia by lots of companies and I don’t think this is an indication of a broader issue, but it is something that is serious that needs to be investigated.”
The chief executive of Adia, George Zdanowicz, said in a public statement last month his organisation had wanted to work with McNair to address the allegations. But McNair’s decision to resign its membership, effective 16 September, left the association hamstrung.
“In informing Adia of its decision to resign its membership, McNair cited financial constraints and difficult circumstances,” Zdanowicz said.
“Adia is disappointed by this decision. We would have preferred to work with McNair, support the investigative process, and work through the allegations to the industry’s ultimate benefit. Prior to resigning their membership, McNair failed to provide us with the information we had previously sought regarding the allegations. With their resignation, we can no longer continue investigating the matter.”
In subsequent comments to the Guardian, Zdanowicz said the peak body had had no further contact with McNair. He said the Adia board was reviewing validation processes for fieldwork and its approach to compliance training.
The whistleblower had wanted his complaints to be dealt with internally and recognised the harm that could be done to his career in going public. He subsequently went to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, but it declined to investigate.
That left him with little choice but to take his allegations public to ensure they were investigated, he said..
He said the support of the Human Rights Law Centre was invaluable in navigating the complex law granting protection to people like him.
“Having a respected organisation like HRLC that has a dedicated whistleblower section as my advocates made all the difference in my employer and I being able to maintain a civil working relationship where I was able to perform high quality work to this day,” he said.
