Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present two government responses to committee reports as listed at item 13 of today’s Order of Business. In accordance with the usual practice, I seek leave to have the documents incorporated into Hansard.

Leave granted.

The documents read as follows—

Commonwealth Government response to Environment and Communications References Committee report

The capacity of communication networks and emergency warning systems to deal with emergencies and natural disasters

November 2012

INTRODUCTION

The Senate Environment and Communications References Committee tabled its report, The capacity of communication networks and emergency warning systems to deal with emergencies and natural disasters on 23 November 2011. The report contains six recommendations. The Commonwealth Government response to each of the recommendations made by the Senate References Committee, are provided below.

While the Commonwealth has a national coordination role, primary responsibility for the protection of life, property and the environment rests with the states and territories, who are the first responders to emergencies in their jurisdictions. Therefore, state and territory emergency management agencies have full autonomy in relation to: (i) whether and when to issue an emergency warning, (ii) which delivery mechanisms to use to disseminate the emergency warning, and (iii) the content of the warning. Individual states and territories choose which warning technologies to adopt and when to activate them in accordance with the specific circumstances of an incident.

All states and territories have disaster or emergency plans that include a communications component for the dissemination of rapid onset emergency warnings to the community. At the Commonwealth level, the Bureau of Meteorology (the Bureau) issues warnings and watch notices via the broadcast media, HF Radio and Fax, recorded telephone and the internet, directly to the public for weather warnings (such as severe thunderstorm, high sea, flood and tropical cyclone warnings) and, in conjunction with Geoscience Australia, also issues tsunami warnings. Warnings issued by these agencies also inform the warning messages that state and territory control agencies disseminate to the public.

The states and territories are also responsible for the communications systems within their jurisdiction. The Commonwealth’s role is to support public safety operations by, inter alia, making adequate provision of spectrum for use by agencies involved in the defence or national security of Australia, law enforcement, or the provision of emergency services, including for use by other public or community services.

RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation 1

2.11 The committee recommends that interoperability of narrowband voice radiocommunications between federal, state and territory emergency service organisations is achieved as soon as practicable and that all services attending major incidents be compelled to maintain a common emergency communications platform to ensure seamless real time communication from and to the Incident Controller.

Commonwealth Position: Supported

The Government supports this recommendation, noting all jurisdictions are moving towards mobile radio networks that support real time and seamless communications.

The Attorney-General’s Department (AGD) through its membership on the National Coordinating Committee for Government Radiocommunications (NCCGR) is working with the states and territories to achieve improved narrowband voice communications interoperability within the indicative time frame set out in the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed framework. This work includes achieving consensus amongst all jurisdictions on technologies and Standard Operating Protocols that will assist with moving towards fully interoperable radio networks and operating procedures. The Government understands that the COAG endorsed framework does not prescribe a single technology for jurisdictions (and agencies within them); rather that each jurisdiction as part of their current and future procurement cycles considers technologies that will enable voice communications interoperability with other Emergency Service Organisations (ESOs) throughout Australia. Accordingly, relevant Commonwealth agencies are in the process of planning to transition their voice communications to systems that will be interoperable with state and territory ESOs operating within spectrum harmonised for government use in the 400 MHz band.

Recommendation 2

2.50 The committee recommends the Commonwealth Government allocate sufficient spectrum for dedicated broadband public protection and disaster relief (PPDR) radiocommunications in Australia.

2.51 The committee further recommends that any allocation of broadband spectrum to emergency service organisations (ESOs) for PPDR must be provided on the basis of interoperability amongst Australian ESOs and with ESO counterparts overseas.

Commonwealth Position: Noted

The Radiocommunications Act 1992 states that the object of the Act is to provide for management of the radiofrequency spectrum in order to:

(a) maximise, by ensuring the efficient allocation and use of the spectrum, the overall public benefit derived from using the radiofrequency spectrum;

(b) make adequate provision of the spectrum:

  (i) for use by agencies involved in the defence or national security of Australia, law enforcement or the provision of emergency services; and

  (ii) for use by other public or community services;

(c) provide a responsive and flexible approach to meeting the needs of users of the spectrum;

(d) encourage the use of efficient radiocommunication technologies so that a wide range of services of an adequate quality can be provided;

(e) provide an efficient, equitable and transparent system of charging for the use of spectrum, taking account of the value of both commercial and non-commercial use of spectrum;

(f) support the communications policy objectives of the Commonwealth Government;

(g) provide a regulatory environment that maximises opportunities for the Australian communications industry in domestic and international markets;

(h) promote Australia’s interests concerning international agreements, treaties and conventions relating to radiocommunications or the radiofrequency spectrum.

The then Commonwealth Attorney-General, the Hon Robert McClelland MP, and the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy,

co-chaired a roundtable meeting on 10 May 2011 on the matter of public safety mobile broadband. The key outcome of that meeting was the establishment of a multijurisdictional high-level officials’ Public Safety Mobile Broadband Steering Committee to progress this work, led nationally by the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.

Membership of the Committee includes representatives of the following key national stakeholder groups, committees and agencies:

The Committee has analysed public safety mobile communications needs, developed models to meet those needs and collected information to assist the ACMA in its determination of spectrum requirements.

The Commonwealth has worked with the states and territories to develop a national implementation plan for a nationally interoperable public safety mobile broadband capability. In parallel with this activity, the Commonwealth has considered whether radio spectrum should be allocated and, if so, what the quantum of a possible allocation would be.

The Commonwealth announced on 29 October 2012 that it would make provision for 10 MHz from the 800 MHz band for the specific purpose of realising a dedicated, nationally interoperable public safety mobile broadband cellular 4G data capability.

The offer of the spectrum to the states and territories will be at a Public Interest Price and is conditional on factors including:

In terms of interoperability with counterparts overseas, this will be guided by the domestic approaches that those countries take as well as future outcomes of key fora such as regional radio harmonisation in region 3 (the Asia-Pacific region in which Australia sits).

Recommendation 3

3.63 The committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government together with national, state and territory emergency service organisations and radio and television broadcasters, develop a secure database of up-to-date contact details for key personnel to be used during an emergency.

Commonwealth Position: Noted

The Commonwealth, state and territory agencies and the ESOs all have media services and dedicated databases in place that perform this role.

The Australian Government will work with the states and territories, through the Australia-New Zealand Emergency Management Committee (ANZEMC) (formerly the National Emergency Management Committee), to effectively coordinate the maintenance of appropriate contact details in both emergency service and media organisations for use during an emergency.

Recommendation 4

3.69 The committee recommends the Commonwealth Government require guaranteed access to emergency call services for people with a disability at all times.

Commonwealth Position: Noted

The Government is a member of the National Forum on Emergency Warnings to the Community which has recently completed drafting the document, ‘Inclusive Communications Guidelines for Emergency Managers’. These guidelines, when finalised, will be used as a tool to help emergency managers understand the requirements to assist people with disabilities during emergencies. They are intended to be used in conjunction with each state and territory’s own policies and procedures.

The Government is aware that people who are deaf, hearing and/or speech impaired often have limited access to emergency services outside of the home as a result of not being able to access a teletypewriter to call the National Relay Service (NRS) dedicated emergency number 106. In response to this need, the Government included mobile access to text-based emergency services for people who are deaf, hearing impaired and/or speech impaired in the new NRS tender. On 15 August, the Telecommunications Universal Service Management Agency (TUSMA) issued a request for tender to identify and select a company(s) to provide the NRS for the next five years. The tender has now closed and a public announcement is expected in early 2013.

On 12-13 January 2011, the NRS experienced interruption for nearly 24 hours as a result of severe flooding in Brisbane where the NRS call centre is based. However, it should be noted that this interruption did not affect access to the 106 emergency number. Since that time, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has been working with the NRS service provider, Australian Communication Exchange (ACE), on lessons learnt and opportunities to better mitigate disruptions in the event of similar emergency situations. This has resulted in a number of new initiatives, including new redundancy strategies and software improvements, to better prioritise certain types of calls.

Recommendation 5

3.81 The committee recommends emergency service organisations in collaboration with television and radio broadcasters, the print media and other relevant organisations, use regular and ongoing public education well in advance of an emergency situation as an opportunity to teach the public about their responsibilities during an emergency and how they can appropriately prepare themselves for such an event.

Commonwealth Position: Noted

The Commonwealth notes this recommendation is directed at emergency service organisations, radio broadcasters, the print media and other relevant organisations. However, in a broader context, the Commonwealth and all state and territory governments are implementing the COAG National Strategy for Disaster Resilience 2011 (the Strategy).

The Strategy focuses on building disaster resilient communities across Australia, including educating people about risks and that disaster resilience is a shared responsibility. Aligned to this Strategy, the Commonwealth delivers education programs including:

The recently released DisasterWatch phone app provides access to emergency and disaster information in a mobile device format derived from authoritative sources in the states and territories and agencies. The app also provides public educational information, such as how to prepare for various hazard events. More than 11,000 downloads of the app have occurred since its launch in December 2011.

Recommendation 6

4.33 The committee recommends the government consider granting public broadcasters priority access to fuel during times of emergency for the purpose of broadcasting emergency warnings and information, and in a way that does not impede the ability of emergency service organisations to access fuel.

Commonwealth Position: Noted

Australia’s state and territory governments have constitutional responsibility for planning and coordinating the response to fuel shortages within their territorial boundaries and have appropriate legislation and associated response plans in place to manage such emergencies.

Whilst every jurisdiction has legislation in place to address a liquid fuel supply emergency, not every emergency will trigger the use of that legislation. Many emergencies that include localised fuel distribution issues, but which do not include an overall fuel supply problem for the jurisdiction, are managed under general emergency response legislation rather than liquid fuel specific legislation.

As such, during an emergency within a particular jurisdiction, determinations about access to fuels, including for public broadcasters, will be a decision for the relevant state or territory government.

At a national level, the Liquid Fuel Emergency Act 1984 (LFE Act) grants the Commonwealth Minister for Resources and Energy the power, by legislative instrument, to identify a person or organisation as an essential user of fuel for the purpose of a national liquid fuel emergency. Declaration of a national liquid fuel emergency under the LFE Act remains a low probability event, as it would require a severe (i.e. prolonged and widespread) national shortage of fuel.

Government Response to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee Report on the:

Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012

November 2012

Australian Government response to recommendations of Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report on the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012

Summary table of Government response to recommendations

The following tables summarise the Government’s response to the recommendations from the Committee’s report.

Of the Committee’s twenty one recommendations:

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation 1

The committee recommends that the application of the exception in proposed APP 2.2(b) be clarified to make it clear that APP 2.1 does not apply where it is impracticable for the APP entity to deal with ‘individuals who have not identified themselves or used a pseudonym’.

Response: Accept

The Government notes the committee’s view that a clarification to the provision would be helpful to ensure that it is clear that Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 2.1 does not apply where it is impracticable for the APP entity to deal with individuals who are seeking to use a pseudonym. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012 (the Bill).

Recommendation 2

The committee recommends that to avoid confusion, the subheading to proposed APP 7.1 in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to read 'Use or disclosure' or 'Direct marketing', rather than 'Prohibition on direct marketing'.

Response: Accept

The Government acknowledges that amending the subheading of this section may be helpful in more accurately reflecting the substance of the provisions. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Bill.

Recommendation 3

The committee recommends that proposed APP 7.2 and APP 7.6 in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to ensure consistency with the notification requirement in APP 7.3, and enable individuals the opportunity to opt out of direct marketing communications at any time.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government agrees that consumers should be able to opt out of direct marketing involving the use or disclosure of their personal information at any time. That is the practical effect of APPs 7.2, 7.3 and 7.6 although the point at which they are made aware of the opt-out requirements may differ depending on the relationship between the direct marketer and the consumer.

The Government notes that companies engaged in direct marketing under APP 7.3 will be required to give notice about an opt out mechanism in each direct marketing communication and should consider adopting this approach as good privacy practice. However, given the different forms and contextual nature of online direct marketing, and the likely future developments in this area, the Government’s preferred approach would be for additional practical level details to be covered by guidance issued by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC). In that respect, the Government notes that it has already accepted an Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) recommendation that the OAIC develop and publish detailed guidance about the new direct marketing principle (see rec 26-7), including some key aspects of proposed APP 7.2 and 7.6.

Recommendation 4

The committee recommends that proposed APP 8.2(b) in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to require an entity to inform an individual of the practical effect and potential consequences of any informed consent by the individual to APP 8.1 not applying to the disclosure of the individual's personal information to an 'overseas recipient'.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government notes that the provision already requires that information be provided to the individual about the effect of providing consent in these circumstances. The Government considers any further guidance on meeting this requirement would be best placed in guidance material issued by the OAIC. OAIC Guidelines could provide advice on the information to be given to the consumer so that they are clear that the consequences of providing consent in such circumstances are that the entity will no longer be responsible for the protection of their personal information by the overseas recipient, and what, if any, additional information should be provided where it is possible and practicable for the entity to know of other practical effects or potential consequences.

Recommendation 5

The committee recommends that the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill be revised to clearly explain that an entity will be required to inform an individual of the practical effect and potential consequences of any informed consent by the individual to APP 8.1 not applying to the disclosure of the individual's personal information to an 'overseas recipient'.

Response: Accept in principle

Consistent with the Government’s response to recommendation 4, the Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.

Recommendation 6

The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to clearly explain the enforcement-related functions and activities of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, as justification for the classification of the 'Immigration Department' as an 'enforcement body' in item 17 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.

Response: Accept

The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.

Recommendation 7

The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to clearly explain the scope and intended application of the terms 'surveillance activities', 'intelligence gathering activities', and 'monitoring activities' in item 20 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.

Response: Accept

The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.

Recommendation 8

The committee recommends that the provisions contained in item 82 of Schedule 1 of the Bill and for each Australian Privacy Principle which contains a 'permitted general situation' or 'permitted health situation' exception, a note should be added at the end of the relevant principle to cross-reference proposed new section 16A of the Privacy Act 1988 and/or proposed new section 16B of the Privacy Act 1988, as appropriate.

Response: Accept

The Government notes the committee’s views that the legislation could be more ‘user-friendly’ and that a cross-reference located in some of the APPs to the exceptions in clauses 16A and 16B may be appropriate. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Bill.

Recommendation 9

The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to explain the intended scope and application of the 'diplomatic or consular functions or activities' exception set out in item 6 in the table to proposed new subsection 16A(1) of the Privacy Act in item 82 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.

Response: Accept

The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.

Recommendation 10

The committee recommends that proposed new subsection 6Q(1) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to require an appropriate amount of time, such as 14 days, to have elapsed from the date of a written notice before a default listing can occur.

Response: Accept

The Government accepts the recommendation and will insert a requirement that at least 14 days must elapse from the date of the written notice before default information can be disclosed to a credit reporting body.

Recommendation 11

The committee recommends that the written notification in proposed new subsection 6Q(1) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to include a warning about the potential for a default listing by a 'credit provider' in the event that an overdue amount is not paid within a set period of time.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government agrees that further information should be provided to consumers about the consequences of failure to pay. However, the Government considers that the Credit Reporting Code of Conduct (CR code) is the most appropriate place to set out requirements on the information to be provided to consumers in the written notice required under 6Q(1). This will ensure that the written notice provides comprehensive advice on what matters must be included, for example additional information about credit reporting and how to obtain a credit report.

Recommendation 12

The committee recommends that proposed new subparagraph 6Q(1)(d)(i) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to reflect $300, or such higher amount as the Australian Government considers appropriate, as the minimum amount for which a consumer credit default listing can be made.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government agrees that the minimum amount for a default should be reasonable. The Government recognises that there are strong arguments proposed both for and against changing the current amount of $100. A regulation-making power is included in paragraph (d) of the definition to provide flexibility to vary the minimum amount to a higher level. The Government considers that economic modelling of the impact of changing the minimum amount for the listing of a default to $300 is necessary. The Government will consult with stakeholders on this issue in the development of the Privacy Regulations.

Recommendation 13

The committee recommends that the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V in item 29 of Schedule 3 of the Bill, include as a criterion the timeframe within which an individual's 'default information' can be listed by a 'credit provider'.

Response: Accept

The Government agrees that there would be benefit in providing further guidance around the timing of listing default information in the CR Code, and encourages the OAIC, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V as to what should be included in the CR Code, to include as a criterion the timeframe within which an individual’s ‘default information’ can be listed by a ‘credit provider’. This will ensure guidance around the issue of reasonable timeframes within which a listing should be made is considered as part of the CR Code drafting process.

Recommendation 14

The committee recommends that the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V in item 29 of Schedule 3 of the Bill, include a requirement for credit providers to fully consider an application for financial difficulty assistance under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 before an individual's 'default information' can be listed.

Response: Accept

The Government agrees that there would be benefit in providing guidance in the CR Code around the consideration of applications for financial difficulty assistance before listing default information. The Government notes that this will only be relevant where a person has applied for hardship assistance prior to default.

Recommendation 15

The committee recommends that the Australian Government consider prohibiting the re-identification of 'credit reporting information' which has been de-identified for research purposes in accordance with proposed new subsection 20M(2) in item 72 of Schedule 2 of the Bill, and whether a proportionate civil penalty should apply to any breach of that prohibition.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government agrees that the risk of re-identification of previously de-identified personal information is an important issue. However, the Government considers that further evidence on the nature and scope of the risk of re-identification is necessary. The Government notes that the Commissioner will issue rules relating to the use of de-identified information for research purposes. The Government will review the situation 12 months after the Commissioner issues rules to determine whether additional measures dealing with the risk of re-identification are necessary.

The Government is aware of concerns expressed to the Committee that the provision may prohibit research currently conducted on credit issues in the community. In order to ensure that such research is permitted to continue, the Government will amend clause 20M to provide that research must be in relation to ‘credit’, rather than the narrower concept of the ‘credit worthiness of individuals’.

Recommendation 16

The committee recommends that proposed new sections 20T and 21V in item 72 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to:

Response: Accept in principle

The Government accepts that all entities that hold information should correct it if found to be incorrect. This was the Government’s clear intention in drafting the correction obligations, including the notification requirements. The general quality obligation in 20S and 21U would operate to require the entity holding the disputed information to make the correction. However, the Government considers that the clarification recommended by the Committee would be useful, and that this kind of detail would be best placed in the CR Code.

Recommendation 17

The committee recommends that the regulations made pursuant to section 100 of the Privacy Act 1988 provide a mechanism for 'credit reporting bodies' and 'credit providers' who have received a request for the correction of an individual's personal information to note on the individual's credit file that a correction is under investigation, with the notation to be removed upon completion of that investigation.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government considers this to be an operational matter best dealt with in the CR Code. The matter could also be dealt with as part of education processes to inform individuals about exercising rights already available to obtain credit reports and request corrections. The Government considers that it is important that the suggested notation requirements do not add lengthy procedural steps which extend the length of time required, and add costs to, a process that is intended to be simple and user friendly.

Recommendation 18

The committee recommends that the Bill be amended to enable a 'credit reporting body' or 'credit provider' to correct an individual's personal information in exceptional circumstances, such as in the case of natural disasters, bank error, fraud, medical incapacity, and mail theft.

Response: Accept in principle

The Government agrees that certain exceptional circumstances should be considered by credit providers and credit reporting bodies when listing defaults or considering whether to correct information on an individual’s file. The Government considers that guidance relating to the consideration of exceptional circumstances could be dealt with in the CR Code. The Government considers it a matter for sta