Thursday, 26 March 2015
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2015; Third Reading
I had not intended to make a third reading contribution, but I think there were a few points raised by Senator Ludlam that do need some response.
Firstly, I thank him for his concession that he has used loose language and his reference to 'bad' information. I personally have found, through the many people I have communicated with about the facts and the details of this matter, many have come back to me and said, 'Thank you very much for a detailed and considered response. We now understand the circumstances,' rather than some of the 'bad' information—to use Senator Ludlam's words—that has been circulating in this debate.
Let me make a few critical points here, points that Senator Ludlam has indeed glossed over. Mandatory data retention is not mass surveillance. Let me repeat that:—