Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

It's reflective of the complete lack of interest that the former government had in the Privacy Act that the only set of amendments that were produced by the former government for the whole of the nine years between 2013 and 2022 were amendments that I brought to the House in May of 2013 to create a scheme of notifiable data breaches. The then Liberal opposition said that they were in favour of the scheme of notifiable data breaches that were contained in the bill that I gave the catchy title Privacy Amendment (Privacy Alerts) Bill. Unfortunately, the bill, having passed the House of Representatives in 2013, lapsed on the proroguing of parliament for the election in 2013. The bill, despite the support expressed for it by the then Liberal opposition, did not reappear for another three years, and the scheme of notifiable data breaches did not become law until January of 2018. That is reflective of the near-complete lack of interest that the Liberal opposition, when they were in government, had in bringing the Privacy Act, which the member for Goldstein rightly points out was passed in 1988, into the digital age.

I don't detect from any of the things that any members have said about this legislation that it's other than supported. Indeed, everybody appears to recognise the need for the very substantial updating of the Privacy Act to bring it into the digital age. That's, of course, the process that the government has now embarked on, but it's going to be a big process.

The amendments that were moved by the member for Goldstein propose updated wording for the definitions of 'personal information' and 'consent'. These were among the matters that were considered by the very broad review of the Privacy Act that was carried out by the Attorney-General's Department, which the government has published, along with a later response by our government to that very broad review of the Privacy Act. We have agreed, in principle, that the definitions of both of those terms—that is, 'personal information' and 'consent'—should be updated to make it clear, as I did when I was introducing this bill, that the Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 is just the first stage of the government's commitment to providing individuals with greater control over their personal information and bringing this legislation into the digital age so that it's fit for purpose.

The government has clearly stated that it intends to continue to advance proposals that it has agreed to in principle to progress the response to the Privacy Act review. We are conducting targeted consultations with stakeholders on draft provisions.

It's really important to ensure that the amended definitions, which are foundational to the operation of the act, are drafted carefully so that they are fit for purpose and workable in a diverse range of contexts. For that reason, the government does not support the amendments moved by the member for Goldstein, which is not to say in any way that there's a disagreement in principle that, along with many other provisions in the Privacy Act, there is a need for amendment and for the whole of the act to be brought up to date.

See this speech in context