Page 4389 - Week 10 - Thursday, 22 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
commissioner about the long-term storage of images of vehicles captured by point-to-point cameras. This would even include images of vehicles that were not breaking the speed limit. The government’s amendment will specify in the legislation that point-to-point camera data may not be kept for more than 30 days. I do commend the intent of this amendment and it does go some way to addressing privacy concerns. It is necessary that the legislation requires that this potentially personal data is systematically destroyed.
However, the Greens feel it is necessary to have regard to an important principle when it comes to privacy and the collection of data; that is, that there should be a specific purpose for collecting and storing this data. It should not just be collected for no specific purpose and then released for extended purposes.
This recommendation is clearly made in the government’s forward design on point-to-point cameras. It recommends that images of non-offending vehicles are deleted from roadside equipment as soon as practicably possible. This opinion is also in line with the Queensland Travel Safe Committee and the Victorian Privacy Commissioner who both recommended that the collection and retention of personal information should be limited to that which is necessary to achieve clearly articulated purposes and deleted as soon as possible.
Given the concerns I have raised, my amendment would change the time frame for which data could be stored to 14 days. The government has confirmed that 14 days is the amount of time that is required for the point-to-point technology to work effectively, taking into account software and hardware limitations. Therefore, 14 days is necessary for a legitimate purpose. Our recommendation is that this is the time allowed before data of non-offending vehicles should be deleted.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (5.45): The Canberra Liberals will be supporting the Greens’ amendment. We do have serious concerns about the privacy implications of this legislation, as I have raised in the media on a number of occasions and in this place. In fact, it was in July last year that I first put out a media release asking questions such as: Will the data be able to be used as evidence? How, where and for how long will the data be stored? Will motorists be able to find out what data the ACT Government holds of their vehicle movements?
It is also worth noting that, through Freedom of Information, we got draft minutes from a steering committee meeting held on 18 June last year at which a representative from the Australian Federal Police said that the AFP did recognise the data storage implications and that in practice people would be following up incidents quickly and seven days storage may be quite adequate. So with that information, in addition to what Ms Bresnan has already stated, I think 14 days is adequate.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (5.46): The government will be opposing this amendment because it is simply unnecessary. It goes beyond anything recommended by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner or indeed the Human Rights Commission, who both concluded that the specification of a reasonable
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video