PRIME MINISTER:
It's terrific to be here at the Australian Federal Police Melbourne headquarters. It’s good to be with the Minister Michael Keenan and with Commissioner Andrew Colvin.
I want to say thank you to you, Commissioner, and thank you to all of the AFP staff this morning for the briefing that you provided to the Minister and myself on metadata and its importance in fighting crime, whether it be child abuse, whether it be terrorism, whether it be fraud, drug importation. Whatever it is, metadata is vitally important – absolutely critical.
Now, as we know, technology is changing all the time and telecommunications companies are not keeping these records for as long as they did. We have, if you like, a burning platform and as a result of that burning platform, increasingly, police and other crime fighting agencies are going blind.
That's why we need this metadata retention legislation. It's an absolutely vital part of the national security legislation that this Government has been progressively introducing over the last few months.
The legislation is in the Parliament. It is being currently looked at by the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security. That Committee is reporting at the end of the month. As soon as that report comes down the Government wants the Parliament to deal with it, because as we know, from the bitter experience of the Martin Place siege, as we know from the Charlie Hebdo atrocity in Paris, there are a whole range of people – sadly, people in our country – who want to do us harm and it's absolutely vital that we maintain the capacity to trace, to detect, to protect, the Australian public against all kinds of crime.
This Government will not rest until our community is as safe as it possibly can be and a vital part of that is getting this data retention legislation through the Parliament. So, that's the challenge for all of us: to get it through the Parliament. I am determined to ensure that that happens as quickly as is humanly possible.
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
Thank you, Prime Minister. If I can just say on behalf of the Australian Federal Police and my colleagues in law enforcement around the country, firstly welcome to our Melbourne office headquarters. You have been briefed, of course, today and the Prime Minister has seen a number of investigations that we are conducting out of this office here that rely so heavily on data retention and metadata for them to be successful.
If I can echo the comments of the Prime Minister, we've said on many occasions that this is a basic foundation building block for investigations in this country. Without it, our success at solving and preventing crime – serious crimes, not just Commonwealth crimes, state and territory crimes – will be severely hampered. I don't want to rely on luck for my officers to be able to access the information they need in relation to solving some of the most serious crimes that this country has seen.
So, the importance of this legislation, the importance of law enforcement around this country is doing now to work with the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, to help this report, to help inform Government, to move this legislation through Parliament is what we're very focussed on today.
Prime Minister, to you, and the Minister, thank you for your support. As I keep saying, luck is not a factor in terms of what I want our officers to rely on with these investigations. Thank you.
JUSTICE MINISTER:
Commissioner, thank you for hosting us at AFP headquarters this morning to brief the Prime Minister and I about the importance of metadata. It really is impossible to overstate how vitally important it is as a tool for both the Australian Federal Police but also state and territory police forces all around Australia.
Every serious crime type, whether it be murder, rape, national security, child exploitation, requires the use of metadata as an investigative tool for police.
If we were to remove the ability of police to know that they can access that metadata within a prescribed period, in this case two years, we would really be tying one hand behind their back in the fight against serious crime and in the fight against all crime types.
The Prime Minister, myself and colleagues will be working very diligently to make sure that we can make the case to the Parliament, pass this legislation as soon as possible to give law enforcement and our security agencies the certainty they need to do their job and to keep Australians safe.
QUESTION:
Prime Minister, just on metadata first, could you just tell us what is going to be captured under this legislation and if you're not yet clear on what that is, doesn't that make it difficult for others to vote in favour for it?
PRIME MINISTER:
This is precisely the kind of thing that is being looked at by the Joint Standing Committee and once the Committee's report has been given to us, it's absolutely vital that we crack on and get the legislation through.
Essentially, metadata is data about data. It's the data that the system generates. The data that you, the user, generate is different. That will require a warrant for access, but the police need general access on authorisation for the metadata.
So, what we’re asking the telecommunications companies to do is to keep the data that they generate. We're asking them to keep doing what they used to do which increasingly they're not doing, because of the change in technology. I might ask Commissioner Colvin to add to that answer.
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
Thank you, Prime Minister. Obviously, I don't want to pre-empt the work of the Committee; we're working with the Parliamentary Joint Committee on this at the moment. There is a schedule that outlines the metadata types that law enforcement is interested in. As I've been on the record saying before, there's a difference between what is possible and what is permissible with metadata. As technology is increasing, metadata is quite broad. This legislation confines it to those specific pieces of information that are critical to law enforcement – the identification principles around communication.
We're working with industry very closely at the moment on what that data set looks like. Industry have been very responsive to law enforcement and to the Government, we're working through the Attorney-General's department, and as I said, I don't want to pre-empt what the Committee may find and hand down in its report, but it will be quite specific about what the data is that has been requested. There's a lot of information out there at the moment about what the data set is. It is quite specific and it is quite detailed. I don't share the concerns that it’s as broad as people are saying or that it's ambiguous, but, again, let's not pre-empt the work of the Committee.
QUESTION:
How much is it going to cost to implement?
PRIME MINISTER:
This is a good question and we're getting some work done on that. Obviously, we're working with the industry as well. But, even if the costs are in the order of a couple of hundred million, you've got to remember that this is a $40 billion plus sector. So, the costs involved are comparatively modest and, obviously, we the Government are prepared to work with the sector to ensure that we bear our fair share of the costs as well.
QUESTION:
When do you expect to know what those costs will be?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's something that we will be continuing to work with the sector on.
QUESTION:
Previously, law enforcement has said in a parliamentary inquiry that they didn’t know how useful metadata actually was to getting a conviction or to running certain inquiries. How has this changed?
PRIME MINISTER:
I've just seen a briefing; it's a condensed version of the briefing that has gone to the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security and the briefing involved three specific important criminal cases – a range of criminal cases – a drug importation case, a child protection case and a counter-terrorism case. Now, meta-data was absolutely critical to the resolution of all these cases and, certainly, in the case of the counter-terrorism case, there were at least two mass casualty terrorist events that were in planning that were prevented in large measure because of the access to the metadata.
So, this isn't just nice to have; this is something which is absolutely essential if we are to protect the Australian community.
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
Thank you, PM. I think the context of the statement that was made at the Committee is the important bit. What was asked and has been asked of all law enforcement in this country is can we, looking backwards, tell with some certainty exactly what role metadata played in criminal convictions. Our systems aren’t configured to be able to tell us with that level of validity what role metadata played in a broader investigation. As we’ve said many times, it is a foundation building block for all our investigations.
I’ve put on the record at Committee before that in the order of 90 per cent of our counter-terrorism investigations, in the order of 90 per cent of our serious and organised crime investigation rely on metadata. That question was about looking back at it from conviction back to what role did metadata play. The answer is a systems answer that we can't categorically give the validity, so we need to understand the context of the way that it was answered. Nothing has changed. Metadata is fundamentally important to our investigations and our prosecutions.
QUESTION:
So, is the legislation about overcoming the challenge of the telecommunications companies not keeping the data? Is that the key challenge?
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
There's a lot of misconception about the legislation. Firstly, it’s not giving police or security agencies any new powers. This is about providing certainty as to how long the industry retains the data. The data in many cases is being retained now, but it’s inconsistent, and this is the point I'm making about luck. I don't want my officers to rely on luck that the company who holds the data for a particular serious investigation holds it for two years, may hold it for seven years, may have deleted it after one week. This is about providing consistency and certainty to industry as well as consistency and certainty to those agencies – security and law enforcement agencies – who need this information.
QUESTION:
How long would you like them to keep it for?
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
The Bill before the Parliament at the moment is two years. We think that's a sensible compromise in terms of meeting the needs of the community and balancing that with the needs of law enforcement.
QUESTION:
There were some reports that if people just transit their online lives into the cloud or into Gmail or into services outside of Australia they can escape the metadata laws. Is that right?
COMMISSIONER COLVIN:
I don't want to stand here today and tell you how you can avoid the legislation; that's not in my interests or law enforcement's interests. Although, let’s say technology is advancing and we obviously need legislation to keep pace with technology. This legislation is attempting to do that. What I will say, though, is people need to leave a digital fingerprint, effectively, so even if you are using a Gmail account for instance, you’re using an over the top provider that is an application provided by an overseas company that may be out of the reach of legislation, you still need to make a footprint somewhere where you connect to the internet. This is about that basic identifier of who it was that connected to the internet at that time.
QUESTION:
Prime Minister, how confident are you of receiving bipartisan support, particularly in the wake of the tragic Sydney siege?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's essential that we do. It's absolutely essential that we do, because if this legislation is to be dealt with swiftly by the Parliament, it does need the support of the Labor Party. Now, we have thus far largely had the support of the Labor Party for our national security legislation. We've had good support from the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security. That report will be out at the end of the month. I hope it's a unanimous report and then let's get this legislation dealt with as quickly as we can.
I believe that in the wake of the attack on the policemen here in Victoria, in the wake of the Martin Place siege, in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo atrocity, the public want protection and this gives the public the protection they have a right to expect.
QUESTION:
Arthur Sinodinos was asked last night whether you'd be Prime Minister this time next week. He said, “Ask me next week.” That doesn't sound too certain. What do you think?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm getting on with Government. I am doing what the public elected me and elected the Government to do. We're cleaning up Labor's mess, we're building a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia. That's what I am doing every day and that, I believe, is what my colleagues want to do. They want to us get on with government, stop the navel gazing. We were given chaos by the former government and the last thing we want to do is to recreate it. We want to be a strong and stable and adult Government.
QUESTION:
But there’s various headlines this morning – ‘chaos in the House’, another report suggesting that your leadership is in its death throes. How confident are you that you will be the Prime Minister this time next week?
PRIME MINISTER:
I am very confident. I am very confident. I know my colleagues, I trust my colleagues, I respect my colleagues. I know my colleagues all got elected to end the chaos and they are as determined as I am to make sure that that's exactly what we do.
QUESTION:
Prime Minister, do you accept that Arthur Sinodinos remains a respected political strategist and thinker within the Liberal Party?
PRIME MINISTER:
I respect all my colleagues.
QUESTION:
Do you respect Arthur Sinodinos?
PRIME MINISTER:
Absolutely. I absolutely respect all my colleagues and I stand by all my colleagues because that's what a leader does. But, I just want to stress, I was elected, we were elected as a Government, to clean up Labor's mess, to build a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia. We weren't elected to focus on ourselves; we were elected to focus on the Australian people and doing the right thing by all of them.
QUESTION:
Do you want a commitment from Malcolm Turnbull that he will not challenge if you haven’t already received one from him?
PRIME MINISTER:
We've just had two days of Cabinet discussions. They were very broad-ranging discussions, over just about every portfolio and that's what all of my colleagues are doing. They are supporting the Government and they're getting on with government and I have the full and unanimous support of the Cabinet.
QUESTION:
Prime Minister, Senator Sinodinos said he does support you, but that his support is not unconditional. That then raises the question, what are you going to change on the policy front that will fix these issues? Or one repeated issue that's been raised is the presence of Peta Credlin and her role in your office. Is she still on your staff today?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to get into a whole lot of internal navel gazing. What am I going to do is refer people to the speech that I gave to the National Press Club earlier in the week. Our focus this year, it's jobs, it's families, it's a strong economy and a secure nation. That's what our focus is and in the short-term there'll be a families’ package that will focus on better childcare that puts more money in parents' pockets. Then there'll be a small business tax cut. This is what we need, if families are to be better off, if businesses are to be in a better position to grow, to invest and to employ.
QUESTION:
Just very specifically, though, is Peta Credlin still on your staff today?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
QUESTION:
Ok, so back to the policy issues and Senator Sinodinos, is it time to dump the Medicare co-payment plan entirely given how controversial that’s been?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, as Sussan Ley, the Minister, has indicated, we are working with the medical profession and with other experts on a better system – a system which is more sustainable, so that we can continue to have an excellent Medicare system far into the future.
At the moment, as I hope all of you know, Medicare is costing us $20 billion a year. A decade ago it was $8 billion. A decade hence, on present projections, it will be $34 billion.
We want Medicare to be strong and sustainable for the long-term and that's what we're talking to the medical profession about.
Now, I don't have a problem with co-payments. Obviously, we already have a wide range of co-payments in the health system. We have co-payments for the PBS, many patients get privately billed and they have more than simply a co-payment. The important thing is to protect the system, to make it sustainable and ensure that vulnerable people continue to be looked after.
QUESTION:
So you’ll stick with the co-payment?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's something that we are discussing with the medical profession and other experts. We certainly want to see appropriate price signals in the system, but we want to do it in a way which protects the vulnerable. I think the lesson of last year is that if we are going to go forward with these things – and I believe we must – we have to do it working with the medical profession rather than against them.
I'm conscious, if I may say so, generally, when it comes to budget measures from last year, we will work with the Senate to get the best possible deal, the most responsible deal that we can, but our focus really is not just on last year, it's on this year. It's not on last year's Budget; it's on this year's Budget and the centrepiece of this year's Budget will be a tax cut for small business and a much better deal for families that puts more money in parents' pockets.
QUESTION:
Prime Minister, just on the Bali Nine..?
PRIME MINISTER:
On the Australians on death row, we oppose the death penalty; we do whatever we humanly can to try to ensure that no Australian suffers the death penalty. We're not going to engage in last-minute megaphone diplomacy, but I just want to assure people that the Australian Government has left no stone unturned to try to ensure that these two Australians on death row have their sentences commuted. We've left no stone unturned.
Now, another subject which you might want to ask me about is Peter Greste. I think we're all thrilled that he's back home. We really are thrilled that he's back home. We'd like to see his colleagues back in their homes as well, but we're really pleased to see Peter Greste back and, as well as congratulating and thanking the Minister for Foreign Affairs for her work, I would acknowledge the work of President al-Sisi of Egypt. I've had several conversations with President al-Sisi about the Peter Greste matter. He has been very sympathetic and understanding from the word go. President al-Sisi is a friend of decency. He is a man of humanity and compassion and I have to say that I think he is someone who Australia can continue to work with on a whole range of issues.
Thank you.
[ends]