That doesn’t really answer my question. I’m asking why the Government is rushing in legislation that it seemingly doesn’t even understand. It’s almost as if another body has drafted this and just given it to the Gov’t to pass as law. I’ve said before, anything to do with Nat security needs to be examined thoroughly, this doesn’t pass the smell test to me.
No, it doesn’t, … to most of us, and nor to Labor either, … and the way they did it, pushing it into the last hour of sitting and shutting down at 5pm rather than extending, thereby forcing Labors hand on it, and allowing no time to debate those amendments, was one of the most underhanded bits of skulduggery I’ve ever witnessed.
But it may well have been for no more than to try to wedge Labor so they could point the finger and say LABOR DON"T WANT AUSTRALIA SAFE!!, … which, laughingly, they did anyway in the House regardless of the fact Labor smelt the wind and had acquiesced and already passed it, … which was just as bizarre, as it was transparent.
They rushed it 100% for the politics. The government might not sit before the the next election. They want to talk about a surplus and national security there two perceived strengths.
The only way this legislation works is if there allready is back doors and then all this talk is moot.
If this was a serious bill, there would be a transitional period, pre compliance checks, a department to oversee, auditing, money allocated, and you would hope the privacy and legal aspects dealt with.
Instead it’s just we can ask Facebook for data and if they refuse fine them. What’s a bet no one asks them.
The long term implications are still true, this policy and tech will eventually get sorted out.
On a side note why is everyone freaking about banking?
Police and other parties allready have access to banking records, they don’t need this legislation for this. They are not going to put back doors into banking. They don’t need to.
It’s kinda why I don’t buy it. No one could be that stupid to think that’s a workable answer.
Does it even work though. I mean you get half the message but you don’t get the reply and in some cases do you get to see who they are even communicating with.
The only reason I can see this being rushed through legitimately is if both parties were given a security briefing that would indicate an imminent theat.
Labor got wedged on encryption. If there had been a terrorist incident in the NY, it would have been blamed, even though the laws won’t come into effect until January.
According to Insiders, there is some sort of deal between Wong and Cormann that amendments will be revisited when Parliament next sits.
For my security clearance, I have to allow access to banking records. Otherwise, for the general public, access is generally restricted to transactions of $10k or more without a warrant for reasonable cause.