Bill Debate · In Committee
Senate · Wednesday 29 October 2025
Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia
The Senate debated amendments to Schedule 4 of the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, which proposed changing terminology from 'intercepting' to 'accessing' in international production orders. Senator Shoebridge moved an amendment to oppose Schedule 4, citing concerns from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights that the changes would broaden data sharing with the United States, including for non-target individuals. Assistant Minister Chisholm defended the bill as necessary technical updates to align with operational realities and existing legislative intent, denying that it expanded surveillance powers. The government opposed the amendment, and the division resulted in the amendment being defeated.
The amendment to oppose Schedule 4 was defeated in a division of 30 to 12.
Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.
Opened the debate
Ghosh opened the proceedings by noting that hard copies of the amendments had not yet been circulated to all senators. The member sought confirmation from the chamber on whether to proceed with the debate despite the delay in distribution. Ghosh facilitated the process by checking if other members were content to continue while waiting for the documents.
Government response
Chisholm argued that the bill required urgent passage to resolve technical issues preventing agencies from exercising existing powers as intended. The minister stated the amendments were necessary to support prosecutors in complying with disclosure obligations and to finalise machinery-of-government changes following an administrative arrangements order on 13 May 2025. Chisholm maintained that the changes did not expand the ability of foreign agencies, such as the United States, to access Australian data, but rather clarified how prospective content data could be received regardless of technical methods.
Shoebridge questioned the timing of the bill given an ongoing Home Affairs review into surveillance, arguing the legislation should wait for those recommendations. The senator cited the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report, which warned that broadening international production orders would exacerbate privacy concerns and allow sharing of data on non-target individuals. Shoebridge moved an amendment to oppose Schedule 4, expressing deep concern about sharing expanded surveillance data with the United States administration and relying on the committee's findings to justify the opposition.