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

Because it is done in another way, Senator, which I have been trying to explain to you. With all due respect, it advances the argument not one iota for you to quote a report to me that expresses a view which is a contested view. We know that some people have that view and we know that others have a different view. The point is not to make the trite observation that there are different points of view here. The point, surely, is to explain the rationale of your critique and for me to explain to you the rationale for why the bill has been prepared the way it has.

Remember, Senator, that what this bill does is amend the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act. The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act already has a provision, section 180F, which, as it is currently written, reads:

180F Authorised officers to consider privacy

Before making an authorisation … in relation to the disclosure or use of information or documents, the authorised officer considering making the authorisation must have regard to whether any interference with the privacy of any person or persons that may result from the disclosure or use is justifiable, having regard to the following matters:

(a) the likely relevance and usefulness of the information or documents;

(b) the reason why the disclosure or use concerned is proposed to be authorised.

This bill inserts, as well, a number of other criteria to which regard must be had by proposed subparagraph (aa):

(aa) the gravity of any conduct in relation to which the authorisation is sought, including:

(i) the seriousness of any offence in relation to which the authorisation is sought; and

(ii) the seriousness of any pecuniary penalty in relation to which the authorisation is sought; and

(iii) the seriousness of any protection of the public revenue in relation to which the authorisation is sought; and

(iv) whether the authorisation is sought for the purposes of finding a missing person;

So that is your answer, Senator. We are inserting a range of new considerations to which regard is to be had but, most particularly for the purposes of your inquiry and, indeed, Senator Leyonhjelm's inquiry, the new criterion specified in (i) is:

(i) the seriousness of any offence in relation to which the authorisation is sought;

So the concept of proportionality that I have mentioned to you is captured and explained in section 180F.