George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Leyonhjelm, the answer to your question is that your premise is wrong, because that would be content. And it is not correct to say that the heading line on an email would be caught by this legislation. It is not, because that is content. So that is the simple answer to your question. More broadly, except where the states and territories may have made specific statutory provision, of which I am unaware, the relationship between doctor and patient is not protected in the way that the relationship between lawyer and client has traditionally been protected. So, for example, a doctor called to give evidence in the witness box could be required to disclose matters about a patient, which he only knew by reason of a professional consultation, whereas a lawyer could not be asked a question obliging him to disclose information provided to him by a client. The conceptual bases of lawyer-client privilege are quite different from the reasons the law does or, in this case, does not protect other relationships which, in the public arena, are regarded as confidential. Bear in mind also of course, Senator Leyonhjelm, that lawyer-client privilege is really an aspect of the rules of evidence. It is an aspect of the admissibility or exclusion of evidence in a proceeding before a court.