A substantial amount of media and public attention on the issue of workplace surveillance has been created by an article published in the Sydney Morning Herald on Monday 14 April 2008.  That article quoted the Commonwealth Attorney-General Mr Robert McClelland as saying that Labor intended to give extra powers to intercept telecommunications to private-sector companies dealing with critical infrastructure, and that these new powers were necessary to avoid the threat of cyber terrorism.  These powers are currently only held by a select few intelligence, police, and anti-corruption organisations specifically named in legislation.

Under the law as it currently stands, it is illegal to intercept a communication passing over a telecommunications system unless the person making the communication knows it is being intercepted.  This is why, for example, when you telephone a call-centre you will usually hear a recorded message that your call may be monitored for various purposes.  Similarly, if a company’s Internet usage policy notifies employees that their Internet usage may be monitored, then that monitoring would not be an illegal interception under Commonwealth law, although State and Territory laws dealing specifically with the issue of workplace surveillance may impose additional requirements in some states.

(more…)

Filed in: General, Interception

EFA has been actively involved during the last four years in efforts by the Parliament to deal with the vexed issue of interception of stored communications (e.g. email), and we have fought to ensure that there is an appropriate balance between protecting the privacy of telecommunications users and meeting legitimate needs for access by security and law enforcement agencies.

The 2007 Bill currently before Parliament includes major new powers for security and law enforcement agencies and significantly changes the existing “telecommunications data” access framework. It contains provisions that were not recommended, nor even mentioned, in the Blunn Report, and some provisions that are contrary to recommendations in the Blunn Report. Furthermore there are a number of technical problems with the drafting of the Bill that would create severe practical problems if implemented. Accordingly, EFA has recommended that this Bill be rejected by the Parliament. A Senate Committee is inquiring into the Bill.

See: EFA’s submission to the Inquiry

Filed in: Interception, Privacy

EFA’s submission to the Attorney-General’s Department expresses serious concerns about the Exposure Draft of Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007. The draft contains new powers enabling law enforcement agencies to access telecommunications data without a warrant, which were not recommended in the Blunn Review Report, and other provisions that are contrary to some recommendations in the Blunn Report. EFA would be unable to support passage of the proposed legislation in its current form.

See EFA’s submission to the A-G’s Dept.

Filed in: Interception, Privacy