Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I thank the House for this opportunity to make a short statement on these reports and acknowledge the chair as well as other committee members, such as the member for Bowman, in the House at the moment.

The CLOUD Act was signed in December 2021 under the former coalition government, and it's pleasing to see the continued bipartisan approach to pursuing this very worthwhile arrangement between two countries with a strong history of cooperation. Through the committee process, it was very clear that the agreement had set out to achieve a very simple goal: bring more criminals to justice in a shorter time frame for the safety of the community. The committee heard that a great need for this agreement has developed in this age of connectivity, brought about by the widespread use of the internet.

With all the good the internet has brought, it has also been used for illegal activity, and online communication services have been increasingly used for crime. The key problem has been access of information for Australian investigators who are investigating serious crimes committed on our shores while that information is stored on servers in the United States and vice versa. A lot of electronic data can be distributed over different services, locations and jurisdictions. In most cases, the bulk of it is in the US. Currently, investigators are relying on mutual legal assistance treaties, which involve court orders and processes before Australian investigators can access that information from private companies. This can lead to major delays, which in turn can lead to investigations not proceeding or other investigations which can be settled more quickly taking precedence.

The national interest analysis stated that it can take more than 12 months for data to be supplied from the US to Australian law enforcement agencies. The report highlights an important point from the NIA, which said:

… if electronic evidence cannot be obtained in accordance with Australian court timeframes, this can result in charges being withdrawn, less serious charges being pursued, or a weaker case being put to the court. This can ultimately lead to lower rates of conviction and lesser sentences being imposed, if at all.

It's a situation which leaves vulnerable victims of crime at risk and also risks the safety of the community. This agreement will lead to reduced time frames for the acquisition of relevant data relating to the commission of a serious offence by allowing investigators to go straight to the source. They'll be able to circumvent the US court process and go directly to data storage companies and obtain information, subject to relevant privacy safeguards and within certain boundaries, without engaging with the US legal system. There are countless unspeakable crimes being committed across the world with the aid of the internet. We must be doing everything we can to stop it, which is why we have provided our support for this treaty action.

Finally, it is important to note that, where US investigations could lead to the death penalty, Australia reserves the right to step in and not grant approval. Likewise, if the US has freedom-of-speech concerns with evidence being provided to Australia, the same provisions apply. I thank the committee for recommending that binding treaty action be taken. Briefly, on the Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation, this joint statement initiative was agreed to on behalf of Australia by the former trade minister, the member for Wannon, under the coalition government. This is an important step to reducing red tape and regulatory costs for Australian service exporters, making it easier for Australian businesses to export to the world. We know that red tape is the enemy of small business, and we should always do everything we can to reduce it. I thank the committee for endorsing this action, and, finally, I would like to thank the secretariat for its hard work on both reports and those who made submissions to the inquiries.

See this speech in context