OZLOG: Ludlam raises ISP snooping issue in Senate

Renai LeMay
21 June 2010, 4:04 PM


The Greens have questioned the government over its ISP data logging and snooping plans in the Senate.


Greens Communications Spokesperson Scott Ludlam has questioned the Federal Government in the Senate over a controversial new proposal that could see Australians’ web browsing, email and telephone records tracked by internet services providers.

The senator asked Senator Penny Wong — representing Attorney-General Robert McCLelland — in the Senate this afternoon whether the Government was considering a proposal which would see such records kept. The proposal — revealed several weeks ago by ZDNet.com.au, which has since published a major update on the situation — has been dubbed “OzLog” online.

In response, Wong appeared to read out a pre-prepared response which bore a close resemblance to statements the Government has previously issued on the matter.

“I understand the Attorney-General’s Department has been consulting with industry with relation to continuing availability of telecommunications data with reference to law enforcement purposes,” Wong said, noting the information would be valuable in identifying criminal activities and terrorist networks.

She added that the proposal would not see the content of communications tracked — only information which would allow people to be identified online.

Wong said that technology had changed the way telecommunications companies operated, and that the Government was keen to maintain access to the data.

Ludlam also asked Wong whether the Government had costed the proposal, or whether it expected the industry to fund it, and what had industry told the Government in the consultations. In addition, he asked whether the Government was planning to consult with the public about the proposal, or whether it would “repeat the experience of the mandatory internet filter”.

Wong said the proposal would need to meet a good balance between a number of different areas of concern — such as privacy, law enforcement needs, commercial imperatives and so on. She also noted the Attorney-General’s Department had had ongoing consultations with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner over the matter, and any proposal would be considered with relevance to privacy legislation.

However Wong appeared to imply that not all of Ludlam’s questions could be answered just yet. “Your question really goes to what the final detail of any proposal would indicate,” she said.

Ludlam didn’t appear to believe the exchange delivered any insight. “One of those moments when you end up knowing less than before you asked the question,” he said on Twitter afterwards.

Delimiter


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Raindog (User):

I watched Senate today (no I do have a life, and a severe case of man flu), Ludlum carried himself well, not that it got anything other than robotic and monotonous repetition from Wong.

Barnaby fired a few curly ones at the finance ministry too in regards to how they were going to factor in an $11B spend with Telstra but was told it wasn't relevant to finance. curious indeed.

Fair dinkum if your kids behaved the way these senators did you'd flog them to death and send the to bed without dinner. Ludlum being a notable exception, pity he represents a party of nutjobs.

21 June 2010, 5:30 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
Ludlum being a notable exception, pity he represents a party of nutjobs


Rather a party of nutjobs than a party of fascists.



21 June 2010, 6:32 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
Rather a party of nutjobs than a party of fascists.

That's the kind of flawed evaluation that set Team Kevin loose in 07. Looks like they can still count on getting the stupid vote.

Ludlum has som clues, but then there is Bob Brown, and the work experience Sarah-hanson-Young? People seriously voted for that?

21 June 2010, 8:58 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

muttzz (New user):

Quoting Raindog:
That's the kind of flawed evaluation that set Team Kevin loose in 07. Looks like they can still count on getting the stupid vote.

In what way are the Greens nuttier than either of the major parties?

Just asking because "The Nutty Greens" is a term I see mentioned, but not really expanded upon. I can accept it may be unwise to vote for them if I'm given solid reasons, just haven't been given any yet. I'm happy to be enlightened though.


22 June 2010, 3:38 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting muttzz:
In what way are the Greens nuttier than either of the major parties?

You clearly haven't looked too far into their policies. Do you drive a car? Use electricity? Do you want a defence force? Make no mistake The Greens are just as much about a play for power and manipulation as the major parties.




22 June 2010, 10:00 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
Do you drive a car? Use electricity?

God forbid that anybody should restrict Australians from being able to hoon about in four-wheel drives and bogan utes with impunity. Before you know it, we might have to pay fuel prices that the poms were paying eight years ago.


22 June 2010, 10:15 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
God forbid that anybody should restrict Australians from being able to hoon about in four-wheel drives and bogan utes with impunity.

Well that one is in the draw for "stupid reactionary comment of the morning", but there is still time, and another Lee Rhiannon press release could still beat you to the prize.


22 June 2010, 10:20 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
Well that one is in the draw for "stupid reactionary comment of the morning"

I think that reaction says more about you, mate.

I don't see what's so stupid about want to reduce greenhouse emissions - I mean actually *do* it rather than just talk about it like King Kev - and use energy taxes to invest in public transport.

Yes, higher fuel prices would hurt, if that's the way the Greens go, but the truth is that we've been indulged far too long with our big car loving ways over here. If fuel were to go from 1.30 AUD (current Aussie average) to 1.98 AUD (current UK average) per litre then cars would get smaller and more fuel efficient in a big hurry. We might then lose the unwanted disctinction of the being the world's worst polluters per head of population.

Who knows, maybe there'd be some other benefits. Maybe people would get off their arses and start walking and/or riding bikes a bit more. Then we could lose our other unwanted moniker, of "world's fattest nation"! (Or did you think all these things are unrelated?)



22 June 2010, 12:07 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
says more about you, mate.

mate?


Quoting BrownieBoy:
Yes, higher fuel prices would hurt,

so its something we should pursue then?


Quoting BrownieBoy:
but the truth is that we've been indulged far too long with our big car loving ways over here.

you reading a brochure right?


Quoting BrownieBoy:
If fuel were to go from 1.30 AUD (current Aussie average) 1.98 AUD (current UK average) then cars would get smaller and more fuel efficient in a big hurry.

How would that work? I've splash the odd drop of premium unleaded onto my cars from time to time and none of them have ever shrunken.
point #2 why the hell should we pay parity with some silly poms who live on a barren rock with all their oil out to sea?


Quoting BrownieBoy:
We might then lose the unwanted disctinction of the being the world's worse polluters per population head.

better to lose the clear stupidity of believing such a fabricated statistic. Show me the comparative figures to back up that claim and I'll show you where they are erroneous.


Quoting BrownieBoy:
Maybe people would get off their arses and start walking and/or riding bikes a bit more.

Off you go then, just remember the road rules apply equally to lycra clad enviro nazis too.


Quoting BrownieBoy:
Then we could lose our other unwanted moniker, of "world's fattest nation"!

Yet more wild and unsubstantiated claims, pity you missed the noon deadline.


Quoting BrownieBoy:
Or did you think all these things are unrelated?

I'd have said naive, tenuously linked but do go on. I mean why don't we live like they did 1000 years ago, plenty of exercise for everyone, just a pity the average life expectancy was about 25. I can see where the greens get their votes, some are just too silly to really think things through properly. And remember red lights are for cyclists too. :)



22 June 2010, 12:23 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
mate?

It's an Australian term. It doesn't actually mean too much.





22 June 2010, 12:58 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
It's an Australian term. It doesn't actually mean too much.

That's where we differ, there is lots about Australia and being Australian to be proud of. Those who want to white ant that can go whistle.

Back on topic Ludlum appears to demonstrate talent and intellect (at least on matters communication), its an absolute waste to see that talent aligned to a party of nutjob and ideologues that will never be representative.

22 June 2010, 1:05 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
Quoting BrownieBoy:
It's an Australian term. It doesn't actually mean too much.

That's where we differ, there is lots about Australia and being Australian.

Quite so, and I am. You're the one that questioned me using "mate" in the first place though, aren't you?

But there's also lot to be not quite so proud of: total inability to accept any criticism for one.



22 June 2010, 2:21 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
you're the one that questioned me using "mate" in the first place though, aren't you?

I do question you referring to me in that way.


Quoting BrownieBoy:
But there's also lot to be not quite so proud of

I refuse to intimidated by weasel views or any yuppy cringe factor that implies Australians should feel any sort of guilt or self inferiority. much like the nonsense URLs quoted above. I reiterate that Ludlum is wasted in an organisation of out there nutjobs that proliferate the same kind of misinformation.




22 June 2010, 10:51 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Quoting Raindog:
mate?

It's an Australian term. It doesn't actually mean too much.



Quoting Raindog:
Yes, higher fuel prices would hurt,

so its something we should pursue then?

Yes, if it leads to lower carbon emissions and better public transport then. Having the Pacific Ocean in your front room will hurt more.

Quoting Raindog:
Show me the comparative figures to back up that claim

Australians World's Worst Polluters:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/11/2683439.htm

Australia World's Fattest Nation
http://www.theage.com.au/news/health/australia-worlds-fattest-natiomn/2008/06/19/1213770886872.html
Quoting Raindog:
hy don't we live like they did 1000 years ago, plenty of exercise for everyone, just a pity the average life expectancy was about 25

That's right: the life expectancy was 25 because they excersised too much. Nothing to do with medical advances, or the plague or anything like that.



Quoting Raindog:
nd remember red lights are for cyclists too

"Too" implies that there's another group of road users that pays the slightest attention to red lights. It's not one that I've ever managed to see.

And a cyclist is only likely to Darwinise themselves (and good riddance to idiots). How many's a hooner in a bogan four-wheel going to write off?


22 June 2010, 1:07 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

muttzz (New user):

Quoting Raindog:
You clearly haven't looked too far into their policies.

I'm after specifics.


22 June 2010, 4:50 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

I Geek and I Vote (User):

Don't let this serious issue go Scott.

Someone has got to make the bastards behave in an honest and accountable manner.

22 June 2010, 8:44 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user