In this case, I'm going on the premise that consent has a role to play in protecting privacy, but it's unrealistic in today's modern world to expect that all commercial or government use of a customer's data should be subject to consent. That brings us to the concept of consent that is oftentimes implied.
In the event of implied consent, the legal principle is that properly de‑identified data, being something that is entirely possible to do, is simply not personal information under current public sector law. So the government can collect and use it as it sees fit, without having to protect privacy. This is entirely possible, even though we haven't yet reached a conclusion.
Therefore, the rule that seems to apply in this case is that, if properly de‑identified, data is not personal information and consent is not required.
That's one reason we recommend that, even if data is de‑identified, the law should be amended to remain subject to the Privacy Act, so that certain principles apply, even to de‑identified data.