Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document


Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 2 July 2002

411  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister for Defence—With reference to all forms of end product report by the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD reports) which summarise raw intelligence product:

(1) Which ministers received any of the DSD reports that were found by the Inspector-General to be in breach of the Rules on Sigint and Australian Persons.

(2) On what precise dates did this occur.

(3) Which minister’s offices, that is personal staff members or departmental liaison officers, received the DSD reports that were in breach of the Rules on Sigint and Australian Persons.

(4) On what precise dates did this occur.

(5) Did any departments receive any of the DSD reports that were in breach of the Rules on Sigint and Australian Persons; if so, which ones and on what dates.

(6) For both (1) and (3), were all four DSD reports that the Inspector-General found breached the rules received by any minister or minister’s office; if not, how many of the four reports were received by each of the ministers and/or minister’s office.

(7) Of those reports that were made in breach of the rules and were received by a minister and/or minister’s office, did they include either of the two reports containing intelligence information on communications by an Australian lawyer with a foreign client.

(In this question, the phrase ‘DSD reports’ refers to all forms of end product by the DSD which summarise raw intelligence product.  Such reports are variously refered to in the summary of the Inspector-General for Security and Intelligence’s MV Tampa investigation as ‘reports summarising the results of collection activity’, ‘end product reports’ and ‘situation updates’.)