Footnotes
Chapter 1 - Introduction
[1]
The TIA Act was renamed in 2006 from the Telecommunications
(Interception) Act 1979.
Chapter 2 - Overview of the Bill
[1]
The Department has set out the regime diagrammatically in a TIA Act
table: see Additional Information No. 2, Diagrams tabled by Attorney-General's
Department, Telecommunications and Surveillance Law Branch at the public
hearing held in Canberra on Monday 16 July 2007, available from the committee's
website.
[2]
Attorney-General's Department, Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act
1979 Report for the year ending 30 June 2006, May 2007, at
http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Publications_Telecommunications(Interception
andAccess)Act1979Reportfortheyearending30June2006
(accessed 1 July 2007).
[3] p. 13.
[4] The Hon. Mr Philip Ruddock MP, Attorney-General, 'Telecommunications Interception Aids
Prosecution', Media Release 088/2007, 9 May 2007.
[5] See
also NSW Council of Civil Liberties, 'Australian
phones 26 times more likely to be bugged than an American phone', Media
Release, 13 January 2006.
[6] Bronitt, S. and Stellios, J., 'Telecommunications
interception in Australia: Recent trends and regulatory prospects', Telecommunications
Policy 29 (2005), p. 886.
[7] Bronitt, S. and Stellios, J., 'Telecommunications
interception in Australia: Recent trends and regulatory prospects', Telecommunications
Policy 29 (2005), p. 886. See also Bronitt and Stellios, 'Regulating
Telecommunications Interception and Access in the Twenty-First Century:
technological Evolution of Legal Revolution?', Prometheus, vol. 24, no.
4, December 2006, pp 413-428.
[8]. Before the Blunn Review, there were four major reports
dealing with telecommunications interception. They were:
[9] A S Blunn AO, Report of the
Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications, August 2005, p. 34.
[10]
A S Blunn AO, Report of the Review of the Regulation of Access to
Communications, August 2005, p. 34.
[11]
A S Blunn AO, Report of the Review of the Regulation of Access to
Communications, August 2005, pp 34-35.
[12] The Hon. Mr Philip
Ruddock MP, Attorney-General, House of Representatives Hansard, 30 March 2006, p. 98.
[13]
This is confirmed by the Department in their Answers to questions on
notice, 24 July, 2007p. 4. The Department provided, as Attachment A, an
excel spreadsheet outlining the government's implementation of the Blunn Review
thus far.
[14]
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Alert Digest No.7
of 2007, p. 20.
[15]
The UK uses the term 'call associated data': see paragraph 21(4)(b) of the
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (UK).
[16]
See further discussion at paragraph 2.32.
[17]
This is comparable to the traditional use of Call Charge Records by law
enforcement agencies.
[18]
p. 6.
[19]
p. 8.
[20]
p. 4.
[21]
p. 3.
[22]
p. 5.
[23]
The Department has set out the transfer of provisions in table form: see
Additional Information No. 2, Diagrams tabled by Attorney-General's Department,
Telecommunications and Surveillance Law Branch at the public hearing held in Canberra
on Monday 16 July 2007, available from the committee's website.
[24]
p. 12.
[25]
The Department has set out interaction with CSPs diagrammatically: see
Additional Information No. 2, Diagrams tabled by Attorney-General's Department,
Telecommunications and Surveillance Law Branch at the public hearing held in Canberra
on Monday 16 July 2007, available from the committee's website.
[26]
Members of the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) do
not charge police for services in life-threatening situations but are entitled,
under the Telecommunications Act, to recover costs for non-life threatening requests
from police for call records to assist criminal investigations.
[27]
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Alert Digest No.7
of 2007, p. 19.
[28]
EM, p. 41.
[29]
pp 25-26.
[30]
The Department has provided a table of the policy origin of the amendments
in Schedule 2 as Attachment B to Answers to questions on notice taken at the
hearing, 24 July 2007.
[31]
p. 42.
Chapter 3 - Key issues
[1] See,
for example, Optus, Submission 2; Department of Defence, Submission
3; Communications Alliance Ltd, Submission 18, p. 1;
Tasmania Police, Submission 23, p. 2.
[2]
Full details about the consultation process are given by the
Attorney-General's Department, Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, pp 4-8.
[3] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 30.
[4]
Submission 19, p. 2.
[5]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 18. See also Attorney-General's
Department, Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, pp 4-5.
[6] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 10. See also Law Council of Australia, Submission
20, p. 14.
[7] Submission
6a, p. 5.
[8] Submission
20, p. 13.
[9] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 10.
[10]
Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 22.
[11] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 10.
[12] Office of
the Privacy Commissioner, Submission on Exposure
Draft of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007, February 2007, at http://www.privacy.gov.au/publications/subtel0207.html
(accessed 1 July 2007).
[13]
Submission 19, p. 2.
[14]
Submission 6, pp 9-12; Submission 17, p. 3.
[15] Submission
17, p. 3.
[16] Submission
6, p. 9.
[17] Submission
6, pp 9-10. The Department has agreed to review the EM to remove any
ambiguity. See Attorney-General's Department, Answers to questions on
notice, 24 July 2007, p. 13.
[18] Submission
6, p. 12.
[19]
Submission 6, p. 4.
[20] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 22.
[21] p.
8.
[22]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 31.
[23] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 31.
[24] Attorney-General's
Department, Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, pp 10-11. The EFA disputes the Department's interpretation of RFC 2822: see Submission 6b.
[25]
Submission 6, p. 4.
[26]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 9. See also New South Wales
Council for Civil Liberties, Submission 10, p. 3; Australian
Privacy Foundation, Submission 17, p. 4.
[27] Submission
20, p. 6.
[28]
Submission 20, pp 6-7.
[29] Submission
8, p. 2.
[30] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 23.
[31] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 24.
[32]
Submission 4, pp 1-3.
[33] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 2.
[34]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 3.
[35]
Submission 4, pp 2-3.
[36]
Submission 7, pp 1-2.
[37] Submission
21, p. 2.
[38]
Submission 4, attachment, p. 2.
[39]
Submission 4, attachment, p. 2.
[40] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, pp 30-31. See further Attorney-General's Department,
Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, pp 11-12.
[41] Submission
16, p. 1.
[42] Submission
16, p. 1.
[43] Submission
19, p. 2.
[44] Submission
16, p. 1; Submission 19, p. 4.
[45] Submission
19, p. 4.
[46] Submission
10, p. 2.
[47]
Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 5.
[48] Submission
19, p. 3.
[49] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 16.
[50] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 19.
[51]
Submission 5, p. 2.
[52] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 13.
[53]
Submission 11, p. 2.
[54] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 28.
[55] Submission
5, p. 6; Submission 9, p. 1.
[56] Submission
5, p. 6.
[57]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 27.
[58]
Submission 5, pp 2-3; Submission 9, p. 4.
[59] Submission
5, pp 2-3.
[60] Submission
5, p. 3.
[61] Submission
11, p. 2.
[62] Committee
Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 29.
[63] Submission
5, p. 4. See also Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 16.
[64] Submission
9, p. 4.
[65] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 9.
[66] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 6.
[67]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 16.
[68] Submission
5, pp 3-4. See also Telstra, Submission 9, p. 3.
[69]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 30. See also Attorney-General's
Department, Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 6.
[70]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, pp 29-30.
[71] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 1.
[72] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 1.
[73]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 28.
[74] EM,
pp 18-19.
[75]
EM, p. 42.
[76] Submission
14, pp 3-4. See also Premier of Western Australia, Submission 25,
pp 1-2.
[77] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, pp 18-19.
[78] Submission
14, p. 2.
[79] Answers
to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 15.
[80] Submission
19, p. 6.
[81] Answers to questions on notice, 24 July 2007, p. 5.
[82]
Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee, Provisions of the Telecommunications
(Interception) Amendment Bill 2006, March 2006, Recommendation 25, p. 48.
Minority report by the Australian Democrats
[1]
Electronic Frontiers Australia, Submission 6, pp 4-5.
[2]
Committee Hansard, 16 July, p. 10.
[3]
Committee Hansard, 16 July 2007, p. 22.
[4]
Law Council of Australia, Submission 20, p. 6.
[5]
Tom Wright, Geographic Information Systems, at http://www.ipc.on.ca/english/pubpres/papers/gis.htm
(accessed 31 July 2007).
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 1 August 2007 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
