Page 4396 - Week 10 - Thursday, 22 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
prudent approach to this, one that recognises the seriousness of the decisions we take and how they can impact on the community in the short and long term. We believe that the development of surveillance and data collection, even in democratic societies, requires special care and vigilance given the privacy, ethics, human rights and power issues involved. The new sections 29 and 29A proposed in this amendment ensure that images are covered by protections that are at least as strong as that applying to personal information under the Privacy Act 1988.
Another important change is the clarification that images can only be disclosed to police when reasonably necessary for the enforcement of the criminal law or law imposing a pecuniary penalty. This is a new clarification in the bill recommended by the commissioner. As I have said before, given the fact that this new technology will collect and store images of all vehicles, it is appropriate that we put in place strong and sensible safeguards to protect that information.
Function creep is a legitimate concern that refers to the expansion of data collection in the system to include other applications. The way to manage this is with strong processes and laws, and that is what this amendment goes to. New sections 29B and 29C now place obligations on people to whom images are disclosed. They ensure the material is handled properly and is not kept or used for longer than the purpose for which the information was disclosed. These changes were needed and were recommended by the human rights commissioner. They are an important further protection which the Greens support. For the remaining impacts of these sections, I draw members’ attention to the new and very good discussion now included in the supplementary explanatory statement which Mr Corbell has outlined.
The amendments I am proposing amend new sections 29 and 29A that have been proposed by the government. My amendments recognise that large amounts of potentially personal data could be collected through point-to-point camera systems and propose a safeguard against future function creep which could occur by the authorisation on new uses or disclosures under future laws.
My amendment simply requires that future authorising laws must expressly require or authorise the use of the information with reference to the principal act. This means that any potential new uses of this information will be abundantly clear to the Assembly and to others when they consider the new laws. New uses will not be able to occur just because some new instrument indirectly allows it.
I note that the full implications of this bill were not apparent for quite some time. It was not clear in the explanatory statement, in the public debate or from the scrutiny of bills analysis that the bill would allow data to be stored for long periods and used for additional purposes. My amendment ensures that, in future, changes to the use and disclosure of this information in new laws must be expressly declared. I note that this goes particularly to some of the concerns raised by Mr Coe, who has raised general concerns about function creep.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (6.13): This is an area which the Canberra Liberals do have particular concern about. I believe that the amendments on the table tonight assist, but I still believe that, whilst the government has this functionality, there is a genuine risk
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video