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

My question is to our Attorney-General, Senator Brandis. Given the US National Security Agency has proven that it cannot control its own data internally—and I quote the NSA's inspector general as noting:

… wilful violations of NSA's authorities have been found—

what has the Australian government actually done to ensure that information held by Australia's national security and intelligence agencies is secure and that bulk collection of information about Australian citizens has not occurred?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Ludlam for his question. I know this is an area of great interest to Senator Ludlam, so Senator Ludlam will be aware that the Australian intelligence agencies operate under a regime of parliamentary oversight comprising the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security and the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade. They operate under strict statutory obligations under the ASIO Act and the Intelligence Services Act, and they act under strict executive government oversight—both ministerial oversight and oversight by the independent agency of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.

The government is confident that the Australian national security agencies discharge their statutory obligations and that they act in the interests of Australia and of Australians. The senator will understand that it is not the practice of Australian governments, and this has been the case from time immemorial, to comment on particular security matters.

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

That makes you, Senator Brandis, one of the only people left on earth not commenting on security matters. Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Will the government now commence a comprehensive revision of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act as called for by the Australian Law Reform Commission and as recommended by the May 2013 report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, of which you are indeed a member?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In fact—through you, Mr President—Senator Ludlam, I am no longer a member of that committee. However, you were right in saying that throughout the last parliament I was a member of that committee and, as you would be aware, that committee conducted very extensive hearings on the powers of the national security agencies and one of the issues that was the subject of those hearings was the telecommunications interception and access regime. As the honourable senator would be aware, that report is currently before the government for consideration, as indeed is the ALRC report to which he refers. The government is considering those recommendations and, in the event that the government chooses to adopt some, any or all of them, then that will be a decision indicated in due course.

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

Mr President, I ask a final supplementary question and we will see if we do any better with this one. Will the Attorney-General assist the Prime Minister to understand what metadata actually is, given he stated yesterday it was simply billing data when in fact metadata reveals mobile and landline phone records, a person's precise location, the source and destination of electronic mail, their entire social network and their web history? Could the Attorney please give an undertaking to remind the Prime Minister of what this term actually means?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the honourable senator, if I may say so, assumes too much, because the term 'metadata' is not a term of art; it is a term that means different things to different people. I can tell the honourable senator that, during the parliamentary inquiry to which I referred in my answer to his first supplementary question, a number of witnesses gave different definitions of what they understood to be metadata. I myself, on the basis of having been informed by the evidence of those several witnesses during the last parliament, thought that the Prime Minister's description of metadata as essentially billing details was a perfectly accurate, shorthand description of what is a contestable concept.

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Attorney-General, Senator Brandis. Could the Attorney-General update the Senate on the arrest of two men in Sydney this morning on foreign incursion related offences?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Fawcett for his question. This morning, members of the Australian Federal Police and the New South Wales Police Force arrested two men in Sydney after investigations carried out by the joint counter-terrorism team. The Australian Federal Police indicated this morning that the men will be charged with offences under the Crimes (Foreign Incursions and Recruitment) Act. That act makes it an offence for an Australian citizen to travel to a foreign state or to assist somebody else to engage in such travel with the intention of engaging in hostile activity or to train another person to engage in hostile activity.

As this case will shortly be before the courts, I will not comment on it other than to acquaint the Senate with the fact that it will be alleged that one of the two men arrested, a 39-year-old man, was actively involved in recruiting people to travel to Syria to engage in hostile activities—that is, politically motivated violence—while the other man arrested, a 23-year-old man, was preparing to travel to Sydney to engage in politically motivated violence in the course of the Syrian civil war. Those offences carry a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.

In recent months there has been evidence of a growing number of Australians travelling to Syria to fight in or to assist others to fight in the Syrian civil war. This is a matter of grave concern to the Australian government. Those who consider doing so should be conscious that travelling to Syria to fight in the Syrian civil war puts them at risk of arrest and prosecution under the Crimes (Foreign Incursions and Recruitment) Act. The government condemns politically motivated violence in all of its forms and that includes war fighting in Syria.

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Will the Attorney-General update the Senate on the threat posed by Australians who support or engage in the Syrian conflict?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Fawcett, the number of Australians travelling to Syria and surrounding countries to engage in that civil war is unprecedentedly high by comparison with other violent civil conflicts abroad. Of concern to the government is not only the engagement by those persons in politically motivated violence but evidence that Australians travelling to Syria to participate in that conflict are radicalised or further radicalised by violent jihadist ideology. The return of such radicalised persons to Australia, with the capabilities acquired through fighting or training with extremist groups, is of serious concern to the national security agencies. As the Director-General of ASIO observed in the 2013 ASIO annual report:

ASIO is concerned about the potential for Australians in Syria to be exposed further to extremist groups and their ideology.

An individual who becomes involved in the conflict and who holds, or develops, an extremist ideology could return to Australia not only with the intent to facilitate attacks onshore but also with experience— (Time expired)

David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. What is the Attorney-General's advice to Australians who are planning to travel to Syria?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The advice of the government to Australians who are intending to travel to Syria to participate in the Syrian civil conflict is not to do so, not only because they put themselves at risk but, if it is their intention to participate in that conflict, either by engaging in it personally or aiding or assisting those who are engaged in it, they are committing a crime against Australian law, and if they do they will not expect to escape prosecution. In fact, the arrests this morning demonstrate the resolve of the police and national security agencies that these individuals will be identified and prosecuted. As AFP Deputy Commissioner Burn said today, it does not matter who you are or what you believe in, if you choose to illegally participate in a foreign conflict then you are not only breaking the law; you are placing yourself in immense danger.