Senate debates

Thursday, 26 March 2015

Bills

Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2015; In Committee

12:03 pm

Photo of Nick XenophonNick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I appreciate the Attorney's response, but unless they are required to be a contradictor—I am not sure whether the Attorney is proposing to do so in respect of the regulations yet to be promulgated once this bill passes—that changes the very nature of their role, in my view. It makes a very substantial difference in the way that they would deal with particular matters. In the context of these amendments—and in the context of having, in my view and in the views of Senators Leyonhjelm, Ludlam, and the Australian Greens, a more robust mechanism in place—does the Attorney concede that metadata retention can be used for sections 70 and 79 of the Crimes Act, which are the so called leak provisions?

We are talking about the case of Mr Kessing, who maintains to this day his innocence. That was a case where he wrote a report about airport security that was subsequently leaked to The Australian. It was a report that prompted the Howard government, to their credit, to implement a $240 million upgrade to airport security, after a subsequent report by Sir John Wheeler. Does the Attorney acknowledge that, in the context of metadata surveillance, section 70 and 79 of the Crimes Act would be acts to which metadata access would relate?

Comments

No comments