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

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Senator Ludwig) to a question without notice asked by Senator Ludlam today relating to the privacy of online data.

The answer I received from Senator Ludwig in relation to the Australian government's response to the PRISM surveillance scandal that is unfolding in the United States at the moment was rather feeble and indifferent. I do note that Senator Ludwig is not here as the Attorney-General; nonetheless, the brief that the Attorney-General has given him to answer questions in the Senate on this portfolio was extraordinary. It is clearly of no consequence to the Australian government to discover that this gigantic scandal has unfolded and blown up in the United States—in response to a brave whistleblower, who has now had to go to ground in Hong Kong and is in fear of incarceration and prosecution in the US should he be extradited. The Australian government's response to this scandal is simply to remain eyes-downcast and pretend that nothing is happening at all. Journalists Phil Dorling and David Wroe from Fairfax revealed last week that Australian intelligence agencies are receiving huge volumes of information from the PRISM program and that we have a new black data centre under construction not too far from this building to store the volumes of material that is being received from intelligence agencies here and overseas.

Tomorrow I will introduce a bill that will force law enforcement to get a warrant before they can collect warrantless, private communications data, or so-called metadata on Australians. I have also just submitted a motion that will require a vote in this chamber tomorrow. So the coalition might also want to think about whether they wish to join the government in bipartisan dismissal of the consequences of surveillance overreach that would require the Attorney-General before the end of this parliamentary sitting week to stand on his feet in the other place and give the Australian people an explanation of exactly how much the government knows and how much it is willing to share of the consequences of this surveillance overreach on the Australian people.

This is not some fringe concern, as I think the Australian government might be hoping—imagining that this is some marginal concern, that this is cohorts of people wearing tinfoil hats worried about some gargantuan conspiracy theory. If you had said a few weeks ago that the US National Security Agency was able to read your emails as you wrote them in real time or tap live video streams on Skype and other video conferencing services or map your social networks and your private messaging on Facebook—all of these things that perhaps so-called conspiracy theorists might have put into the public domain as a possibility—the real situation is larger and worse than that. It has caused a furore around the world. The Australian Greens would appear to be the only Australian parliamentarians who are concerned about this surveillance overreach over Australian citizens which probably renders the Australian privacy principles not worth the paper they are printed on.

Minister Carr responded to a question over the weekend about whether Australians should be concerned. 'Oh, no, I wouldn't think so,' said Minister Carr. Senator Ludwig just now got through a response that he probably had not even read before it was put into his folder to read into the Senate—no actual response to the questions I put to him. Australian authorities appear to be on Serepax while other parliamentarians and representatives in other parts of the world are actually alert and alarmed about this warrantless, real-time mass surveillance. What sort of tranquilisers are the Australian government on? The UK equivalent to our Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security is going to the United States to ask their questions and put their concerns in person. The European Commission has written to the US Attorney-General. Canada's Privacy Commissioner has launched an inquiry. Germany's justice minister has put their concerns on the record. The Republican author of the PATRIOT Act itself says that the NSA PRISM surveillance system goes too far. He said:

We've gotten used to what "Big Government" looks like – Washington's unchecked deficit spending, the Obama administration's policing of the press and the IRS's targeting of conservative groups. But the problem is bigger than we thought.

This is the author of the PATRIOT Act. He also says:

"Big Brother" is watching. And he is monitoring the phone calls and digital communications of every American, as well as of any foreigners who make or receive calls to or from the United States.

The Australian government might think it can dodge the issue in question time in the Australian Senate, but this is just the beginning of this issue, not the end.

Quite frankly, Minister Ludwig made the government look like muppets today. There is a serious issue to answer here, and tomorrow a vote will be taken which calls the coalition's credentials as liberals into question. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.