Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

To make it easier, you could put amendment (1) separately and amendments (2) and (3) could be dealt with together. The government does not accept (1). It recognises that (2) and (3) are worthwhile amendments and can be accepted. I will go through the detailed reasons for that—it will not take long.

The bill was always intended to ensure adequate protection for journalists and their sources. The amendments clarify these protections and therefore the government supports them. They fit within the objectives of the bill and are consistent with the Commonwealth Evidence Act 1995. The definitions in the bill are modelled on the New Zealand journalist shield provisions. The definitions of ‘journalist’, ‘informer’ and ‘news media’ rely on their ordinary meaning to allow the court to take a case by case approach. These amendments address concerns expressed as to whether the New Zealand definitions are technology neutral and cover all of those engaged and active in the publication of news. I hope that that assists.