By Bert Hetebry We are the mongrels Underneath the table, Fighting for the leavings Tearing us…

Diamonds and Cold Dust: Slaughter at Nuseirat

The ashes had barely settled on a Rafah tent camp incinerated by…

The EU Elections: The March of the Right

The EU elections over June 6 to June 9 have presented a…

Peter Dutton gutless and weak in not reducing…

Climate advocacy project Solutions for Climate Australia stated it was deeply disturbed…

“Powering Past Gas”: Climate Council’s reality check for…

Climate Council Media Release The CLIMATE COUNCIL’s new report, Powering Past Gas: An…

After D-Day

By James Moore “Home folks think I’m big in Detroit City. From the…

Domestic Violence Crisis: Reality or Political Exaggeration?

By Denis Hay Description Explore claims about Australia's domestic violence statistics. Is it a…

Bushfire survivors call out Peter Dutton’s abandonment of…

Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Media Release Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action (BSCA)…


Irresistible Urges: Surveilling Australia’s Citizens

The authoritarian misfits in the Turnbull government have again rumbled and uttered suspicions long held: Australian residents and citizens are not to be trusted, and the intelligence services should start getting busy in expanding their operations against the next Doomsday threat.

This became clear from leaked material on discussions that illustrate in no subtle way the security paranoia afflicting officials in the nation’s various capitals. A merry bunch they are too, featuring the Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton and his advisor and department secretary, Mike Pezzullo. These latest discussions disclose not so much a change of approach as a continuation of a theme the Australian national security has taken since 2001: we are menaced constantly, and need the peering folk and peeping toms to pre-empt the next attack, fraud or swindle.

Central to the latest security round robin is a familiar, authoritarian theme: the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) should be given access to emails, bank records and text messages without the knowledge of citizens, tantamount to a data home invasion. A mutual role would thereby be cemented between defence and home affairs.

Minister Dutton has found it hard to contain his delight at the prospect of further influence, despite rejecting the notion that his moves would lead to carte blanche espionage on home soil. According to the ABC, which has attempted to make sense of the latest chatter, the ASD would be given a larger role on three levels.

The first would involve deploying shutting down or “cyber effects” powers against the usual gifts that keep giving alibis: organised criminals, child pornographers and terrorists. “Penetration tests” on Australian companies to test the value of their cyber security against hacking would also be conducted. The third arm of enlarged power would entail giving the ASD powers to coerce government agencies and companies to improve cyber security.

Over the weekend, the secretaries of Defence, Home Affairs and the ASD issued a joint statement claiming that the latter’s “cyber security function entails protecting Australians from cyber-enabled crime and cyber-attacks, and not collecting intelligence on Australians.”

The secretaries insist on a scrupulousness that barely computes: “We would never provide advice to Government suggesting that ASD be allowed to have unchecked data collection on Australians – this can only ever occur within the law, and under very limited and controlled circumstances.”

The state of protections citizens have is hardly rosy as it is: ASIO is tasked with the issue of conducting espionage on Australian territory though it needs warrants signatured by the Attorney General. The Australian Federal Police also require warrants. The ASD, to date, been a helper rather than a controller, a two-bit player and data cruncher.

Not all ministers are on board with the plan, notably the Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. A palpable shift of power is taking place in the bureaucratic machinations of Canberra, and the suggestions that the ASD be given enhanced powers to produce intelligence on Australians suggests a further circumvention if not outright evisceration of the Attorney-General’s department.

Dutton and his cadres are also mounting an offensive on other surveillance fronts, something typified by the weasel language of the “central interoperability hub”. The Home Affairs department already shows sign of bloating self-importance, floating more ideas about how best to keep the large eye of the state attentive to security threats. A facial recognition system, for instance, is on the table, and is likely to be given the blessing of parliament.

The Law Council of Australia has reason to worry as, for that matter, does everybody else. Giving government agencies the means to identify a face in a crowd can only have a broadening effect, resulting in prosecutions for minor misdemeanours.

On this score, the governments of the states and territories are with the Home Affairs department, having agreed in October last year to the sharing of identity and facial recognition data between all levels of government to target the usual bogeys that threaten Australia’s cobbled civilisation: organised crime, terrorism and identity fraud.

The surveillance sorcerers, it would seem, are rampant, a point made clear in the Identity-matching Services Bill 2018. This potentially insidious bit of drafting “provides for the exchange of identity information between the Commonwealth, state and territory governments by enabling the Department of Home Affairs to collect, use and disclose identification information in order to operate the technical systems that will facilitate the identity-matching services envisaged by the IGA.” (Crypto-authoritarians tend to be rather verbose).

The Bill’s wording also abhors the state of current image-based methods of identification, these being “slow, difficult to audit, and often involve manual tasking between requesting agencies and data holding agencies, sometimes taking several days or longer to process”. The travails of a liberal democracy, ever a nuisance to those protectors citing omnipresent threats.

The Council’s president, Morry Bailes, has already hammered out the words he intends to tell the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security: “Clearly, provision of such capability has been desirable to facilitate detection of would-be terrorists scoping a site for a potential terrorist attack. But that very same identity-matching capability might also be used for a range of activities that Australian citizens regard as unacceptable.”

Even Bailes effuses pieties, thinking that clearly drawn lines on the use of such data will somehow save the sacred cow of civil liberties. (That cow, it must be said, is in a poor state of health as it is). He insists on such canons as legitimate use and proportionality, two features managers of the national security state are inherently incapable of.

“That line should also be assured by law to be fully transparent, understood and consistently applied by all relevant governments and their agencies.” But such a line might creep, advancing “towards broad social surveillance” finding its way “to a full social-credit style system of government surveillance of Australian citizens.”

The issue common to the latest pro-surveillance bingers is an innate desire to remove the judicial arm from the equation. Having a warrant takes time and resources; leaving surveillance to the discretion of state officials is far more expedient and tidy.

As the Australian Human Rights Commission notes, the “very broad powers” granted to Dutton as Home Affairs minister “could lead to further very significant intrusions on privacy.” There are no discernible “limits on what may be done with information shared through the services the bill would create”.

The latest ASD affair, with other surveillance agendas in the wing, suggests that a very unfitting eulogy for Australian civil liberties is being written. Authoritarianism is being kept in check by ever weakening forces and fetters. The insecurity of citizens is deemed a suitable price for the security of the state – just the way Dutton likes it.


Login here Register here
  1. david bruce

    A few short steps away from national socialism, so much admired by the homeland security sycophants? I hope the sharper minds of people like the minister of foreign affairs and trade will prevail!

  2. blair

    Bring on the Election
    I would like to see Labor state that they will dismantle this fascist organisation and legislate to see that this type of concentration of power is totally unacceptable and impossible to replicate

  3. Helen Brennan

    These people terrify me. Dutton is a typical ex Qld copper who regards all those who are not members of his clique ,or should i say coterie, as the enemy and certainly guilty of something.

  4. helvityni

    I’m worried we will witness more of these ‘irresistible’ urges of Dutton and Co…

  5. Andrew Smith

    Never assume that Dutton thought up this ‘architecture’ by himself; the old ‘Anglosphere’ of US, UK and Oz have been following this nativist strategy and ideology for some decades now.

  6. New England Cocky

    There is little doubt that Dutton is a fascist despot in the making and this paranoia about “security” is a personal way to increase his hold over Muddles Turdball.

    Other evidence suggests that Pezzullo is an equally fascist powerbroker intent on returning Australia to the model of Mussolini in the 18930s to 1940s, hardly a suitable aspiration for an egalitarian society, or has the LIarbral Party and their Notional$ mates abandoned that historic model as well?

  7. Kronomex

    This self-serving and evil little fascist will, with any luck, be on the opposition bench after the election (here’s hoping he gets the bullet) and won’t it stick in his throat, like a bone from a refugee he snacked on not long beforehand, to see someone else running HIS kingdom. I can imagine him lying in bed every night and scrunching his little dead piggy eyes up and wishing for something to happen so that he can declare martial law, to protect us of course, and then we’d almost never get rid of him.

  8. etnorb

    Bloody typical of every one in this most inept, flat earth, lying, so-called “liberal” party! And of course, in this case it seems to be led by our chief nazi, effing Dutton! It does seem that maybe 1984 has arrived, albeit some years later than George Orwell predicted! Well, I suppose he has nothing better to do with his time (& this “position” he holds!), than to suggest that we will or should be, spied on by big Government! WTF?? Hopefully, before he can do any more damage to all Australians, he & his party will be gone!

  9. Frank Smith

    Dutton and Pezzullo pose very dangerous threats to all Australians and our way of life. The rise and rise of these two evil characters and the creation of the super-Department of Home Affairs are another legacy of Turdball’s weak leadership and demonstrated capacity to sell his soul to the devil in order to cling onto the Prime Minister-ship. A disgrace all round! This article in today’s Conversation and the associated comments are worth a read.

  10. Dale

    Pezzulo, Dutton, the puppet Turnbull, Abbott, Cash, and all the rest of the nasties, it`s just a perfect storm..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page