Vital News Australia is a news network focused on providing independent and uncompromising journalism.
We won't blindly follow wire services or official press releases that attempt to set the news agenda. We will cover the big stories of the day, but we will broaden the definition of what's important.
In an another attempt by the Australian Government to whittle away the freedoms of ordinary Australians, an order spearheaded by Australian Government intelligence agencies to force all Australian telecommunications companies to collect internet data and phone records of all Australians for up to two years has been announced.
Announced in a discussion paper that was released by the Attorney-General’s Department, 40 proposals have been submitted by Australia’s intelligence agencies that are intended to give them more powers to infringe on your privacy.
As discussed in the paper, some of the changes to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 that have been proposed are:
15 (A): An offence for failure to assist in the decryption of communications (ie.. Fine and prosecute telecommunication companies for not sharing your private information)
15 (C): Tailored data retention periods for up to 2 years for parts of a data set, with specific time frames taking into account agency priorities, and privacy and cost impacts (ie.. All internet data and telephone records must be retained for up to 2 years.
Even more disturbing than the changes proposed to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979, the Australian Government is proposing the following changes to the Intelligence Services Act 2001 .
17 (A): Add a new ministerial authorisation ground where the Minister is satisfied that a person is, or is likely to be, involved in intelligence or counter‐intelligence activities.
The changes proposed under section 17 (A) mean that a ministerial authorisation under the proposed changes to section 13A would usually be issued for a discrete activity for a specified purpose.
So what is a discrete activity and what is a specified purpose? I looked within the document for a definition of discrete activity and specified purpose. As expected, the document doesn’t define these terms, leaving them open to interpretation and abuse.
Under the guise of protecting all Australians from the threats posed by al-Qaeda, these proposed changes by the Australian Government will effectively create a long-tail record of all internet usage and phone calls without the users consenting to it and being made aware of the surveillance.
In relation to the use of Internet and other telecommunications services, Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) and telephone service providers are required to comply with the privacy protection provisions of the Telecommunications Act 1997 (C’th) and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (C’th). These proposed changes make an absolute mockery of the current legislation.
The severity of these proposed changes by the Australian Government has been undermined by the lack of reporting in main stream media outlets. In fact, it appears agencies based outside of Australia are more interested in these changes than Australians themselves. There are some within the Australian Government that recognize the significance of these changes.
One government official was recently quoted as saying:
It will be one of the most controversial inquiries the committee has ever held
Privacy, in my opinion, is a fundamental right. If a government has no reason to investigate your actions online and has no suspicions that would warrant the storage and collection of your private data, for what reason do they intend to collect and store your internet data and phone records for two years?
What the Globalists in power fear the most is broad awareness from the public about this proposal.
It’s obvious that the Australian Government doesn’t want the public to know about this and that they don’t want the public to debate and scrutinize the validity of the proposal.
Recently, a government official from the Attorney-General’s Department, Claudia Hernandez, wrote in her decision about releasing parts of the highly censored document that the release of some sections of it:
may lead to premature unnecessary debate and could potentially prejudice and impede government decision-making
No government, especially the Australian Government, has the right to breach our fundamental right to privacy and no government has the right to view our private information without a valid warrant.
I’m sick of how these Globalists are constantly infringing on our right to privacy. Get out of our lives, leave us alone and don’t infringe on a birth right everyone is entitled to.
To read a copy of the discussion paper, click here.