Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Ludwig very much for his contribution to the debate on the Migration Legislation Amendment (Information and Other Measures) Bill 2007. His conceptualising of the bill as access versus privacy is an aspect that I enjoy, one that we have seen a lot of in this parliament in recent times. I will come to the point that Senator Ludwig raised about the costing implications in a minute.

This bill amends the Migration Act 1958 and mirrors provisions in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and the Torres Strait Fisheries Act 1984 to address serious limitations in the provisions to limit access and disclosure of identifying information. Senator Ludwig touched on that.

Identifying information includes personal identifiers such as a person’s photograph, fingerprint or signature. Under all four acts, it is an offence to access and disclose identifying information unless the access or disclosure comes under a list of permitted accesses and disclosures. The limited grounds upon which this information can be accessed and disclosed is affecting the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s ability to continue a range of normal working practices such as disclosing photos and signatures to other agencies—an issue we have touched on many times in recent weeks in this parliament.

The bill addresses this problem by adding some additional access and disclosure grounds to the four acts. These additional grounds are targeted at alleviating the most pressing difficulties being experienced under the current arrangements. For example, access and disclosure will be permitted where it is done to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to life or to health. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship will be able to disclose identifying information to the Migration Agents Registration Authority to assist in investigations into complaints against migration agents. Disclosure of identifying information to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions will also be permitted, to assist in investigations and prosecutions.

The amendments in the bill to replace ‘noncitizen’ with ‘person’ in various disclosure grounds  is to ensure that a permitted disclosure can still occur after the noncitizen from whom the information was collected has indeed become a citizen. However, the act will continue to allow personal identifiers to be collected only to identify noncitizens.

To follow up Senator Ludwig’s point, this bill will also broaden the ability of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship to disclose to a person that individual’s movement records, thereby avoiding the need for the person to access their records through the freedom of information process. This will greatly improve the service that the department can provide. The government, as I understand it—and this is in answer to your question, Senator Ludwig—has not costed the implications of this. This bill will also amend the definition of ‘fisheries detention offence’ in the Migration Act to ensure that enforcement visas are granted to noncitizens who have been brought to Australia in relation to new fisheries offences recently incorporated into fisheries legislation.

In summary, by expanding the currently limited grounds upon which identifying information can be accessed and disclosed, we will improve the efficiency of operations within the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. The bill will also enhance client service by enabling the disclosure of an individual’s movement records to the individual to which they indeed relate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.