Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Most notably, the committee recommended and successfully implemented changes to the bill that gave journalists and their sources some protection from this bill. The committee recommended that the Ombudsman, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and the committee itself be notified where retained data was accessed to identify a journalist's source. This was a worthy measure, but it was not enough. It took Labor writing to the Prime Minister to force the government into creating a warrant regime to protect journalists and their sources. I am not standing here to score points. I welcome this change of heart, and I hope that it gives the media and the broader community some reassurance.

This amendment includes the creation of a Public Interest Advocate, the PIA, which is likely to be a senior barrister or barristers, that must be notified whenever an application for a warrant is made. The PIA will be empowered to stand in the shoes of the journalist and argue why it is contrary to the public interest to issue the warrant. These changes mean much stronger protections for journalists and their sources, certainly much stronger than the government originally proposed. This is a crucial improvement on the bill as originally introduced.

While this bill is largely different from what was originally put forward by the government, there remains some unfinished business. For instance, Labor remains concerned about whether companies should be obliged to store data in Australia. The former director-general of ASIO, David Irvine, recently said that he would be concerned about the security of retained data if it were stored overseas—because it would be 'governed by someone else's sovereign legislative system'.

Senator Ludlam interjecting—

This matter is currently being examined as part of the Telecommunications Sector Security Reform process. This is a process that Labor started in government and which the Abbott government says will be completed well before the end of the data retention scheme implementation period. This is an issue that Labor will have strong views on and will continue to watch with interest.

Our security agencies have requested changes to these laws to support their work in fighting terrorism and organised crime. Labor has held the government to account during this process, as is appropriate—and the bill we debate today is, despite the protestations from my left, of a wholly different character to that which was first introduced into the House in October. Labor will always work to keep Australians safe and, at the same time, to get the balance right in upholding the rights and freedoms enjoyed by all Australians. Getting this balance right can be a challenging task, but it is a task that Labor undertakes seriously and diligently.

It may come as a surprise to some of those in the chamber who have been interjecting, but I when I opened by referring to 'some of the more general arguments and accusations that have been made by some members of this chamber', I was not actually talking about them—until they self-selected by intruding into my contribution. I was referring more to one of our New South Wales colleagues. But by interjecting you have emphasised the stark contrast between your position and that of the Labor Party on this legislation. I commend the bill to the Senate.