Dissenting report by Australian Greens
1.1
Unfortunately the Committee was unable to hold a hearing into this Bill
which makes yet another set of amendments to the Telecommunications
Interception Act, in this case to allow interception, copying, recording and
disclosure of electronic communications in the name of protecting computer
networks from malicious access and building confidence in the online world. It
also allows specified government organisations – law enforcement, national
security, defence and international relations - to intercept communications and
undertake disciplinary actions ensure that computer networks are appropriately
used.
1.2
While much improved through consultation on an August exposure draft,
during the Inquiry into this Bill the Privacy Commissioner, Electronic
Frontiers Australia and the Australian Law Reform Commission recommended minor
amendments to a) clarify definitions of what constitutes "network
protection duties" and "disciplinary actions" b) tighten
requirements to destroy copies of intercepted communications.
1.3
The Australian Greens concur that these amendments are necessary to
clarify the Bill and strengthen its safeguards and are not satisfied that the
Attorney General's Department adequately addressed these suggestions when
dismissing them.
1.4
The Attorney General claims that network protection activities vary for
each network and therefore cannot be defined, however, given that this is the
pretext for this suite of amendments it is not inappropriate that parameters
should be set and the scope and nature of activities more clearly defined.
The Privacy Commissioner asked, "what measures are covered by 'the
operation, protection or maintenance of the network' and when is an
interception 'reasonably necessary?'
1.5
The Attorney states that imposing an obligation to destroy copies of
lawfully intercepted information is unenforceable. As the Australian Law
Reform Commission submitted, arising from the Commission's thorough inquiry
into privacy issues, there is, "no reason why copies of information
obtained from a stored communication warrant must be destroyed but copies of
information obtained from an interception warrant are not... The covert nature of
interception and access to communications requires the safeguard that the
intercepted or accessed information is destroyed as soon as it is no longer
required."
1.6
Given these issues were thoughtfully raised, and could easily be
addressed through minor amendments, the Australian Greens do not share the
Committee's view that the Bill should be passed without amendment.
Senator Scott Ludlam
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page