Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For the benefit of the Hansard record, I will continue from where I was cut off when debate on this bill was last interrupted. This is in regards to the privacy impact assessment I tabled during my previous but short contribution.

For Australian Privacy Principle 5, it is recommended that the department update its relevant public notices in relation to identifying information and privacy and that signs be installed in airports where verification checks are being conducted. These signs will say that the checks are being conducted and that personal identifiers collected will not be retained by the department. I am advised by my department that these recommendations will be implemented shortly after the bill becomes law.

The purpose of this bill is to strengthen the Department of Immigration and Border Protection's powers to collect biometrics for the purposes of the Migration Act or the migration regulations. The bill removes current restrictions and inconsistencies in the collection of biometrics from people at the border and from noncitizens seeking to enter and remain in Australia. Recent terrorism related events here in Australia and overseas reinforce the need to use new technologies to detect persons of concern at Australia's borders. Equally important is the capacity to resolve concerns about the identity and previous histories of noncitizens who are currently living in the Australian community. While the department's biometric program has been effective in detecting people who may seek to harm us, the current provisions of the Migration Act for the collection of biometrics were introduced more than 10 years ago, and obviously a lot has changed in this time.

The bill provides the department with the flexibility to respond to increasing volumes of travellers and increasingly sophisticated attempts by criminals to circumvent Australia's border protection measures. In 2013-14, over 35 million passengers arrived and departed through Australia's borders. This is estimated to rise to in excess of 50 million by 2020. It does this by allowing the use of new and emerging technologies that facilitate increased movement across the border and enables the verification of a person's identity in a quick and nonintrusive way. The reforms in the bill will strengthen border controls. The broad power applies to citizens and noncitizens who arrive and depart at Australia's airports and seaports and will be exercised where identity or security concerns arise. It is important to note that most people will not be affected by the bill and will move seamlessly and efficiently across our border. It is only those travellers who are identified as posing a higher risk who may be asked to provide additional biometrics. The ability to collect personal identifiers from visa applicants offshore strengthens Australia's national security and the integrity of our visa system by detecting presence of concern well before they reach our shores.

Furthermore, the bill will enable the department to detect noncitizens identified as being of concern after arrival in Australia. This will ensure that adverse information relating to noncitizens' behaviour while living in the Australian community is available to inform decision making in regards to an existing visa or grants of a subsequent visa to remain in Australia.

If I could now turn to the reports of the bill from the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, the Scrutiny of Bills Committee and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I commence by thanking each of the committees for their contributions to the consideration of this bill. In response to a recommendation by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, I foreshadow that I will be moving an amendment to the bill during the committee of the whole stage. This amendment will put it plainly on the face of the legislation that persons providing personal identifiers are not required to do so in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way, or in a way that fails to treat the person with humanity and respect for human dignity. This has always been the government's policy intention, and the amendment puts it on the face of the legislation. This government-sponsored amendment in fact goes beyond the amendment that is being proposed by the opposition, which relates only to minors and incapable persons. I note issues relating to the breadth of discretion, safeguards and removing restrictions on the collection of biometrics from minors and incapable persons raised by the committees and by senators during their debate. I remind senators that this particular bill relates to the collection of biometrics only. Existing provisions in the Migration Act which provide a series of rules and offences that govern the access, disclosure, modification and destruction of identifying information will not be changed. These existing provisions will apply to all biometrics collected and retained under this bill. Existing legislative safeguards that apply to conducting an identification test which involves the collection and retention of biometric information will also remain largely unchanged.

These same safeguards are not necessary when checking a biometric using a handheld scanner at the border. This is because the check will occur in public in just the same way as other checks. Many people will be familiar with the explosive trace detection test which is currently used at airports. This check does not involve the retention of a person's biometric information.

The bill removes existing consent and presence requirements for minors and incapable persons in order to protect vulnerable individuals, including children—and this is an exceptionally important part of this bill—from trafficking and exploitation, and to detect radicalised individuals who may seek to harm the Australian community. When required, additional safeguards for the collection of biometrics from minors or incapable persons will be provided for in departmental policies, and these policies will be made publicly available.

I now turn to the issue of mandatory reporting requirements in the event of a data breach. The bill does not amend the robust legislative framework that regulates how personal identifiers are to be accessed and used. This framework creates criminal offences for unauthorised use and disclosure of personal identifiers. The government's view is that this framework is appropriate and the amendment is not required.

Can I just turn to the discussions that I had with Senator Xenophon in relation to this bill, and I thank Senator Xenophon for the exceptionally constructive way in which he approached those discussions. Can I also confirm that the government has agreed that, 12 months after the operation of this bill has commenced, a report will be provided by the Australian Border Force to the minister to be tabled in the parliament. Therefore, it shall be made publicly available and this shall occur within 18 months of commencement. The report will look at issues of the operation of the bill's provisions, including the relevant training of Australian Border Force officers looking at complaints and how complaints are handled. In particular, the report will look at how the Australian Border Force would be alerted to complaints of cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment and how they appropriately handle them.

In summary, the bill establishes a practical framework for the efficient movement of the majority of travellers across Australia's border. It expressly limits the collection of personal identifiers to the purposes of the Migration Act or the migration regulations, it provides the ability to require personal identifiers on a case-by-case basis, and it provides the flexibility to conduct quick and non-intrusive verification checks. Again, I remind people who are listening in to the debate: if you have ever been through an airport in Australia, you may have been one of those people who were chosen for an explosives test. It is quick and unobtrusive, and you keep on moving through the process.

The bill does not amend the defined types of personal identifiers that can be required under the Migration Act, and importantly it does not expand the circumstances for which Australian citizens can be required to provide personal identifiers at Australia's borders on arrival and departure. This bill is part of this government's commitment to ensuring the protection of the Australian community and strengthening the integrity of our migration programs. Measures in the bill are central to continuing to protect the Australian community from the threat of terrorism and other serious criminal activity and, so importantly, to providing greater protection to vulnerable people, including children at risk from trafficking or exploitation. With those comments, I commend the bill to the chamber.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the chair is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Ludlam be agreed to.

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to speak briefly as to why I will not be proceeding with that amendment.

Leave granted.

I do not wish to detain the chamber unnecessarily, but the substance of the second reading amendment was that the privacy impact assessment that Senator Cash referred to be tabled before the debate proceed. Technically that did not occur. In fact, we were all the way through the second reading debate before the minister put that document on the table in her summary remarks a couple of days ago. Nonetheless, that document is in the public domain. When we come to the committee stage, we will be asking a few very quick questions about it, but I will not need to proceed with the amendment for that reason.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So you have withdrawn your second reading amendment. Thank you. The question now is that the bill be read a second time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.