Page 1639 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 3 June 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.16): Madam Speaker, the opposition will support the government’s amendments to this bill. In essence the effect of these amendments is simply to bring into ACT law, commonwealth law that already applies to the ACT. The amendments will exempt the ACT public sector agencies from the territory privacy principles in cases involving information sharing between the ACT and a range of commonwealth security and intelligence agencies in the interests of national security.
The amendments include two measures to protect privacy. Firstly, the head of the commonwealth body to receive information must authorise it in writing. Secondly, the officer receiving the information must certify in writing that the disclosure is connected with the performance of the receiving agency’s functions.
I note that the JACS committee in examining these amendments noted that they engaged the right to privacy under the Human Rights Act. However, the measures are necessary when matters of national security are at stake. The committee also acknowledged the extensive discussion of the issue in the supplementary explanatory statement and considered the points well made in that statement.
I mentioned in my in-principle speech that two issues remain unresolved insofar as ACT law is concerned. One concerns the as yet unresolved issue of how to deal with the statutory cause for action for serious invasions of privacy. The other relates to whether, at some time in the future, ACT laws will be developed to cover the private sector.
I also noted the change in commonwealth government policy relating to the services provided by the Australian Information Privacy Commissioner and how that might impact on the ACT government’s previous intention to appoint the Australian government commissioner as the ACT commissioner. I continue to await the government’s announcements as to its intentions in relation to the appointment of the ACT commissioner and the likely budget impact this will create.
Those matters aside, Madam Speaker, I reiterate what I said at the in-principle stage of the debate, that the people of the ACT under this law will have more certainty about the way in which the government handles the personal information it gathers. We will be supporting the amendments.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (10.18): I will also be supporting the amendment proposed by the Attorney-General. It provides an additional exemption to the act for ACT public sector agencies in relation to records received from or disclosed to specific commonwealth agencies. These are enforcement and intelligence agencies and the rationale is that the exemption is required in the interests of national security and safety. While I am generally uncomfortable with limitations on privacy such as this, I do note that the exemption simply mirrors an existing exemption in the Commonwealth Privacy Act that already applies.
I also note that the supplementary explanatory statement makes the case that the exemption is proportionate and justifiable under section 28 of the Human Rights Act
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video