Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

I first thank the member for Hinkler. He has spoken extremely constructively and helpfully and has demonstrated a degree of versatility that ought to be practised by us all. I also thank the member for Brisbane, who spoke as well. I note that the member for Brisbane has indicated—unlike he did in another place on another bill—his support for this measure and for the approach that the government is taking to recommendations from the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. I will speak to that in a moment. I also thank the member for O’Connor, who emphasised the importance of these powers in the current law enforcement and security environment. I welcome his contribution.

The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007 implements recommendations made in the Report of the review of the regulation of access to communications, by Tony Blunn, a very distinguished former secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department who has held other senior offices as well. He recommended in that report the development of a single, overarching legislative framework for regulating access to telecommunications interception, stored communications and telecommunications data. To do this, the bill that we are speaking to takes the existing relevant provisions of the Telecommunications Act that enable carriers to disclose communications data to law enforcement agencies and transfers them to this bill.

The bill also makes important amendments to the interception regime to allow the use of telecommunications interception to assist in the investigation of all offences relating to child pornography. This change reflects not only the seriousness of those offences but also that these offences are overwhelmingly committed via the internet and can only be combated through access to telecommunications.

The bill has been considered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills and the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. I thank both of those committees for their work. The member for Brisbane raised in debate the query posed by the scrutiny of bills committee and invited me to respond. I have in fact responded to the committee, which has published my reply in its reports, but I note that the member for Brisbane usually does not seem to find this material when it has been in another place. I encourage him, as I did in another debate, to better prepare himself. The committee, as I told them in response, occasioned me to amend the explanatory memorandum to clarify that the exemptions to interception capability granted either by the communications access coordinator or by the body known as ACMA are not legislative in character. I also made some minor revisions to that explanatory memorandum to provide clearer examples of lawful secondary disclosure of telecommunications data and a distinction between the content of communications on the one hand and telecommunications on the other. I have also advised the committee that the power to grant exemptions is already reviewable under the AD(JR) Act. I wrote my signature on this explanatory memorandum, which I table, but I did it while I was walking. It is not that I was having a stroke or a heart attack or something else while I walked—but it is my signature.

I have also considered the recommendations of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in relation to ensuring appropriate privacy protections. I note that the committee recommended that the CrimTrac agency be removed from the list of agencies included in the definition of enforcement agencies. I do not agree with this recommendation, and I note that the member for Brisbane has reached the same conclusion. CrimTrac assists the Commonwealth, state and territory agencies in criminal investigations and, in its role as a provider of national security information, acts as the coordinating agent to obtain telecommunications data for other enforcement agencies. Negotiating access arrangements on behalf of a number of agencies results in economies of scale and more efficient use of resources. I also note that CrimTrac has always been an enforcement agency under section 282 of the Telecommunications Act 1997, listed under its previous name as the National Exchange of Police Information. CrimTrac is not a new addition to this definition.

The committee also supported the use of the communications access coordinator’s determination-making power to issue guidance to agencies on how to take privacy into account. The bill requires the communications access coordinator to consult with the Privacy Commissioner when developing this guidance, ensuring that privacy issues are given full consideration. The government agrees with the committee’s views on the roles of the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security. The Inspector General has extensive legislative powers to oversight the activities of intelligence agencies and will be able to use these powers of inspection and review in relation to access to prospective data by ASIO without the need for additional legislative provisions.

The fourth recommendation of the committee is that the Attorney-General’s Department arrange for an independent review of the operation of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 within five years. The government does not support this recommendation, not because regular review is not important for the interception regime but, rather, because the act is already subject to ongoing review and will continue to be so.

Finally, this bill is a significant step in modernising Australia’s laws for accessing telecommunications information for law enforcement and national security purposes. Mr Blunn concluded that the current distribution of functions between the two acts is complicated, confusing and dysfunctional. This bill clarifies and simplifies the law, consolidating several legislative regimes into a single act. This consolidation will provide a single, clearer regime for law enforcement agencies to use in the performance of their very important functions, and I commend the bill to the chamber.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that the bill be reported to the House without amendment.

See this speech in context