Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (29 March) . . Page.. 999 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

of the surveillance operation is collected. It also requires that they should have a sound knowledge of their obligations under the Bill and the information privacy principles in the Commonwealth Privacy Act.

Mr Speaker, since the time of "The Electronic Eye" report and the Government's response to it, there has been procrastination over actually implementing the committee's recommendations, even though those recommendations, apart from the two to which I have alluded, were accepted by the Government. The procrastination was fostered by a debate focused on the potential cost of the trial and the need for privacy legislation. I am not sure how genuine that debate has been because Mr Osborne, in a question in this place to the Attorney-General, elicited the information that the Government and its agencies have installed more than 350 cameras in various locations around Canberra.

An unknown number of cameras have been installed by private sector firms and organisations. I have to say, Mr Speaker, that I am pleased that the Government has finally allocated funds in the budget, or at least in the draft budget, to fund the trial of surveillance cameras in Civic. The legislation that I am tabling here today will give effect to the committee's recommendations in relation to the need for a model code of conduct. On that basis, with the funding, and with this very important recommendation now potentially able to be implemented, there is simply no further excuse that the Government can mount to explain not keeping a promise that it has been making repeatedly for the last five or six years, and which has been endorsed and supported by the Labor Party since the completion of "The Electronic Eye" report. The Government has no further excuse for not keeping its promises in relation to proceeding with a trial of security cameras in Civic to determine whether or not they do have an impact on law and order and public safety.

The legislation that I am tabling here, Mr Speaker, will ensure that the images captured by all those cameras are used only for permitted purposes, are stored safely, and that the public can have access to them in appropriate circumstances. The Bill establishes a series of surveillance camera privacy principles similar to the information privacy principles in the Commonwealth Privacy Act. I mention in passing, Mr Speaker, that the Commonwealth is planning to extend the application of the information privacy principles to the private sector. At present they apply only to government agencies.

The Bill also establishes a model surveillance camera code to govern the authorisation of surveillance, the management of it, and the operation of any surveillance cameras. The code has been drawn from a number of sources, including the Privacy Commissioner's guidelines for overt surveillance, which were established in 1991, and the Attorney-General's own guidelines, which have been published on the Internet. The principles and the code, taken together, will prevent such unsavoury practices as the installation of surveillance cameras for the purpose of gathering images to be displayed, for instance, on infotainment shows, or on the Internet. Despite the fact that such shows as Wildest Police Car Chases, for instance, are popular and great money-spinners for their makers, they do nothing to assist law enforcement.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .