The Bill as amended gets its 3rd reading. On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 12:06, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> Remember these are proposed as interim powers. > > *Labor members have moved to progress this Bill despite our concerns > because of the evidence from law enforcement and security agencies that > there is a need for these powers over the Christmas period, and because the > proposed amendments deliver adequate oversight and safeguards to prevent > unintended consequences while ongoing work continues.* > > Recommendation 11 > The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to allow a designated > communications provider, who has been given a capability notice under > subsection 317W(1) of the Bill in relation to a proposed Technical > Capability Notice (TCN), to *request a binding assessment* of > > > - whether the proposed technical capability notice would contravene > section 317ZG of the Bill > - the requirements imposed by the notice are reasonable and > proportionate; > - compliance with the notice is practicable and technically feasible; > and > - the notice is the least intrusive measure that would be effective in > achieving the legitimate objective of the notice. > > This request would be made in writing to the Attorney - General within a > reasonable time limit specified in the consultation notice. The Committee > recommends that two persons be jointly appointed to conduct the assessment: > > One of these persons should have knowledge that would enable them to > assess whether proposed TCN would contravene section 317ZG of the Bill, and > should be cleared for security purposes to the highest level required by > staff members of ASIO, unless the Attorney - General approves a lower > security level. > > The second assessor must be a person who has served as a judge in one or > more prescribed courts for a period of 5 years; and who no longer holds a > commission as a judge of a prescribed court. > Both persons must agree that: > > - The requirements imposed by the notice are reasonable and > proportionate; > - Compliance with the notice is practicable and technically feasible; > and > - The notice is the least intrusive measure that would be effective in > achieving the legitimate objective of the notice. > > The report prepared by the technical expert and the retired judge must > also be provided to the Inspector - General of Intelligence and Security > (for oversight of ASIO) and the Commonwealth Ombudsman (for oversight of > the AFP). > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 11:51, Morgan Reed <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I note that judicial oversight is still completely lacking... >> >> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:40 AM Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Some sensible amendments. >>> >>> Recommendation 4 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to incorporate >>> recommendations from the *Commonwealth Ombudsman to establish clear >>> authority to inspect and gather information on the exercise of the industry >>> assistance measures* by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the >>> Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, and State and Territory >>> interception agencies >>> >>> Recommendation 6 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to provide that >>> Technical Assistance Notices (TANs) and Technical Capability Notices (TCNs) >>> be subject to *statutory time limits*, and that any extension, renewal >>> or variation of a TAN or TCN also be subject to a statutory time limit >>> >>> Recommendation 7 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill set out a tiered approval system >>> for state and territory initiated Technical Assistance Notices (TANs), >>> under which *TANs would be submitted for approval to the Commissioner >>> of the AFP* before being issued to the recipient. >>> The intention of this process of approval would be to ensure consistency >>> in decision making, and reporting, across jurisdictions. To give effect to >>> this intention, the Commissioner of the AFP must apply the same statut ory >>> criteria, and go through the same decision - making process, as would apply >>> if the AFP were the original issuing authority >>> >>> Recommendation 8 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to include a >>> requirement that Technical Capability Notices be *jointly authorised by >>> the Attorney - General and the Minister for Communications*, the latter >>> being able to provide a direct avenue for the concerns of the relevant >>> industry to be considered as part of the approval process >>> >>> Recommendation 9 >>> The Committee notes the evidence of the Director - General of the >>> Australian Signals Directorate that a “systemic weakness” is a weakness >>> that “might actually jeopardi se the information of other people as a >>> result of that action being taken”. The Committee also notes the evidence >>> of the Director - General of Security, that the powers in Schedule 1 will >>> not be used to require a designated communications provider to do anything >>> that jeopardises the security of the personal information of innocent >>> Australians. Having regard to those assurances, the Committee recommends >>> that the Bill be amended to *clarify the meaning of the term ‘systemic >>> weakness’, and to further clarify that Technical Capability Notices (TCNs) >>> cannot be used to create a systemic weakness*. >>> >>> Recommendation 11 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to allow a designated >>> communications provider, who has been given a capability notice under >>> subsection 317W(1) of the Bill in relation to a proposed Technical >>> Capability Notice (TCN), to *request a binding assessment* >>> >>> Recommendation 14 >>> The Committee recommends that the Bill include express provision for a >>> *statutory >>> review of the Bill’s operation* by the Independent National Security >>> Legislation Monitor, within 18 months of the Bill commencing >>> >>> Recommendation 16 >>> The Committee recommends that, once the Bill (as amended) is passed by >>> the Parliament, the Committee: >>> >>> - commences a review of the new legislation; >>> - for the purposes of the review, be allowed to hold further public >>> hearings; and >>> - *complete its review of the new legislation by 3 April 2019* >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 11:20, Paul Wilkins <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> PJCIS have released a unanimous report >>>> <http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024247/toc_pdf/AdvisoryReportontheTelecommunicationsandOtherLegislationAmendment(AssistanceandAccess)Bill2018.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf>, >>>> recommending Bill be passed with their amendments. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 11:15, Jacob Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The current Liberal regime (and I would wager also the near-guaranteed >>>>> incoming Labor regime) don’t care about such repercussions though. >>>>> >>>>> Elections are won in swing seats, and swing seats in this country are >>>>> blue collar. What resonates with such seats is the perception of “action”, >>>>> often at the expense of nuance. >>>>> >>>>> This whole shambles is roughly equatable to Sydney’s lockout laws - >>>>> fabricate a moral panic to drum up electoral support for policies that are >>>>> otherwise indefensible. I believe someone earlier in thread earlier linked >>>>> to the Wikipedia page for the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse? >>>>> >>>>> Just replace “drunkenness and coward punches” with “terrorists and >>>>> criminals”. >>>>> >>>>> - Jake >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> AusNOG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>> >>
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
