Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Attorney-General, Senator Cash. The majority of Australians mistakenly believe that political parties must abide by the Privacy Act. However, since 2000 there have been almost no legal limits to the use of personal data for political purposes. The Australian privacy commissioner believes that the exemption should be reconsidered to determine whether it is appropriate, given that the data environment has significantly changed in the last 18 years. Why does the Attorney-General maintain that this legislation is appropriate in the modern data environment, particularly in light of recent revelations regarding Facebook and Cambridge Analytica?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Jobs and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Steele-John for the question. Senator Steele-John, to the extent that I can I will respond, and if I have to take part of the question on notice I will. But, Senator Steele-John, the government is absolutely committed to protecting all Australians' right to privacy. As you would be aware, the Privacy Act itself contains 13 Australian privacy principles, which regulate how private sector organisations with an annual turnover above $3 million and most Australian government agencies can handle personal information. In terms of how the Privacy Act applies to—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Cash. Senator Steele-John, on a point of order?

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate, Mr President, that the minister may not have been sufficiently briefed on this issue. However, I would like to bring her attention back to the nature of my question, which was why the Attorney-General believes, in light of the views expressed by the privacy commissioner, that the exemption is appropriate, given the modern data environment?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Steele-John, you will appreciate that your question did have a lengthy preamble. I believe the minister is being relevant to part of your question. You've just taken the opportunity to remind the minister of your question. I call the minister.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Jobs and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Steele-John, the Privacy Act, as you will also be aware, contains an exemption for members of the Australian parliament, local government councillors and registered political parties and their volunteers and contractors in relation to specified kinds of political acts and practices. The exemption is designed to encourage freedom of political communication and support the operation of the electoral and political processes. However, the exemption does not authorise entities that are subject to the Privacy Act, such as social networking services, to disclose personal information that will be used by politicians or registered political parties for political purposes. If I can get you any further information I will.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Steele-John, a supplementary question.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A supplementary question, Mr President: in 2000, Labor supported the Howard government in introducing the privacy exemption for political purposes, in what the Privacy Foundation has characterised, aptly, as a deal with the devil which gives both parties special rights to exploit and misuse data. Is this not just another example in the sad litany of your lack of integrity, transparency and accountability?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Steele-John. I've granted substantial time after the 30 seconds.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Senator Cormann interjecting—

Senator Cameron and Senator Cormann! I will call the minister, but I remind senators to keep their questions and supplementary questions within the time limits prescribed, which are a minute for the substantive question and 30 seconds for the supplementary questions.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Jobs and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Steele-John, for the question, and the answer to your question is no.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Steele-John, a final supplementary question.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A final supplementary question, Mr President: can the minister confirm whether Minister Tehan did in fact meet with Cambridge Analytica in April 2017, or whether any member of the Liberal Party has met with Cambridge Analytica at any time?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Jobs and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Steele-John, I have no knowledge of any meetings, but I will always be able to provide further information if it comes to hand.