Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
ABC News 24 Afternoon Live -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This program is not captioned.

.

.

..

.

This program is live captioned by Ericsson Access Services. The top stories on ABC News - the Federal Opposition says the Government needs to make clear how much manufacturers can expect to pay for gas. The Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says his government's plans to impose export controls on the gas market could help lower household gas bills. Shadow Energy Minister Mark Butler says Labor's been pushing for the Government to regulate the market. The WA Government has slashed the number of its departments from 41 to 25 in a major overhaul of the public sector. 40% of departments will be amalgamated or abolished under the plan that will come into effect in July. The Premier says the cuts are long overdue and will ensure a more effective system. Westpac has announced it's changing its policies on funding new thermal coal projects, effectively blocking any funding for the controversial Adani coal mine. The bank has updated its climate change policy, saying it will only finance new projects in existing rather than new coal basins. Australia's competition watchdog says it has a strong case against Murray Goulburn and two former managers accused of misleading farmers. The ACCC is alleging the co-op behind the Devondale brand engaged in unconscionable conduct when it set and then cut farmgate milk prices suddenly last year. The decision crippled many dairy farm businesses and plunged the industry into crisis. The country's largest police force has welcomed its newest recruits in Goulburn, New South Wales. The event is the first for the new Police Commissioner Mick Fuller.I am here at that time the graduation at the Police Academy in Goulburn. It is all about families. Families of the graduating officers have flocked to the parade ground. It is a much more relaxed atmosphere after the formalities of this morning. That was when the new 178 recruits were sworn in. These new officers will start work on Monday... We are going to bring you back to that story later but now we take you live to Canberra where AFP Commissioner Andrew Colvin is holding a news conference.I do want to say at this point that what was accessed was the records of calls, not the content of those calls. Just the fact of the existence of the calls in the first place. The actual investigation, the internal investigation that led to this breach, is still ongoing. It related to the unauthorised rrls release of sensitive information to a journalist. The breach, as a result of that investigation, was identified by the AFP as a result of our own review. Once the breach was confirmed, we immediately moved to destroy all of the material that was provided to us as a result of that breach. I can also say that no investigational activity has occurred as a result of us being provided with that material. Put simply, this was human error. It should not have occurred. The AFP takes it very seriously and we take full responsibility for a breach of the Act but I also want to say there was no ill will or malice or bad intent by the officers involved who breached the Act. Quite simply, it was a mistake that should not have happened. It was a mistake that was not picked up and corrected before it occurred by our internal practices and procedures. As you would expect, as a result of this matter and as a result of us identifying this breach, we have been reviewing our internal practices and procedures to make sure they are as robust as possible. We have made significant changes. When this legislation came in 18 months ago, the AFP, along with our police colleagues around the country, moved to put in place a number of procedures and practices to ensure compliance with the law within our organisations. However, on consideration and reflection on this matter, we have now enhanced those. We have raised the level of internal authorisation required for access to data of this type. We are limiting the number of authorised officers who can approve access of this type. We are also re-rolling out and stepping up mandatory training to all investigators and authorised officers to make sure they are fully aware of their obligations under the Act. I have been assured and I am confident that the changes we have made are robust and give me confidence that a breach of this nature should not occur again. As a result of this breach, we have also had cause to review other investigations under way in the AFP that also result to unauthorised release of information in these circumstances, to make sure we have not breached somewhere else. I'm satisfied, on the back of that review, that there have been no further breaches. However, I must say, as a result of the AFP disclosing this breach to the Commonwealth Ombudsman this week, the Commonwealth Ombudsman has today informed me that commencing next Friday, she will launch her own audit of this breach and the circumstances that related to that breach. Of course we welcome this audit. We will work very closely with her office and we will be fully compliant and cooperative in relation to any material, as we always are, with the Ombudsman's inspections of Telecommunications Interceptions Acts requirements. Any recommends the Ombudsman makes we will obviously take very seriously. I will take questions in a minute but I am going to be limited because the investigation is ongoing, as I know many of you know yourses, the Telecommunications Interyeps Act limits what I can say. There should be no way there should be an inference the journalist has commissioned an offence. I don't want any inference the journalist has committed an offence. I want to make it clear it was important to me we were open and honest about this breach. I'm sure the breach would have been revealed through our normal Ombudsman's review processes and reported to Parliament at some point but it was important to me we were open and honest with you about the fact we had breached it and we were taking measures to ensure it doesn't happen again. The final point I'd like to make, probably the most important, is notwithstanding this breach, I believe that the public should have full confidence in the police. I believe the public should have full confidence in this policy, which was a controversial policy that was debated very widely in Parliament and the public at the time. I want to underscore how important access to metadata is to police as a fundamental building block of our investigations. The breach on this occasion occurred because of the very unique and specific circumstances relating to a journalist. I will leave it at that and take questions. REPORTER: Has the journalist been informed their metadata was illegally accessed? Has the leaker or alleged leaker been identified and has action commenced against them?The investigation about the leak is still ongoing. That's why I'm not going to say too much about it. For that reason, we haven't notified the journalist that we have breached and accessed that particular journalist's data without the warrant. Once the investigation takes its full kors course, we will be able to consider what actions we need to take but at this stage, we haven't advised the journalist. Doesn't the journalist have a right to know you breached their rights? That's a fair question. Once the investigation has finished, we will have to consider that. I am trying to be as open and transparent as we can. I don't think there is any question are not trying to be held to be account for it. It is a serious matter. We are not in a position to do that.Has another application for the same metadata been made through the proper processes?No, it has not.Do you intend to that?I will leave it at that. Once we realised we made the breach, we stopped all investigations relating to that line of inquiry and I will leave it at that.Can you explain how, if there was no ill will or malice involved, can you explain in layman's terms how this breach occurred?The legislation as amended 18 months ago, which was about the retention of data but also included specific provisions that if, in the course of an investigation, a police officer was looking to find a source of a journalist, then they would be required to go an extra measure and get a journalist's information warrant. It was all predicated and the vulnerability is the fact that the investigator needs to understand that's their requirement. On this occasion, the investigator didn't. He didn't get the warrant and that's the process...Correct.Has the investigator been suspended or disciplinary action taken?No. I don't believe there was ill will or bad intent here. Clearly we will do some more work to understand exactly what occurred. I don't want to foreshadow where that might end but I think the system's failed the investigator as much as the investigator failed in their obligations to know the law.Can you quantify the metadata? Was it over a particular period of time - not dates but how many months?Any metadata request is time-limited. It is not an open fishing exercise. We have to be very specific about the period of time. Yes, it would have been but, again, it is about the investigation, I'm not going to talk too much about that.Although the material has been destroyed, they have seen it, they can't unsee it, it is clearly to influence the investigation, isn't it?Clearly they can't unsee it. They'll need to consider in terms of next steps of the investigation what weight they put on what they saw but that material was accessed illegally so it can bear no - it can have no bearing on the conduct of the investigation. If in the judgement of the investigators that information may afford evidence at some point later, there is a different process we will have to go through.In terms of what the metadata constitutes, is it phone numbers, times of calls... ? Metadata is a broad term that gets interpreted many different ways. This was the record of one phone number calling another phone number and the time, date and duration of that phone. (INAUDIBLE QUESTION) It would have been all of the calls in a particular period. A one-week period.Only to that period -The data that was accessed inappropriately, unlawfully, related to the calls made by that phone number.It was just calls? It wasn't emails?No, just phone calls. Sorry, I shouldn't say that. It was records in relation to one phone number calling another phone number.If the investigator had gone through a proper process and had a warrant, this is information they would have been able to obtain legally? Absolutely. There is no impropriety in the fact it was related to the investigation. What was improper is the right steps weren't taken in relation to it.Does this not confirm or vindicate some of the concerns that have been raised over the past two years about mandatory retention of metadata?I don't think it does. The changes brought in by the Government 18 months ago, which I certainly took a very keen interest in, tightened the laws around police access to metadata. It put in place processes and practices like this. It limited the number of agencies that could access metadata from what was a much broader set of agencies before. So I think, if anything, the public should have confidence we have found this breach, I'm being very open and honest about the breach. As I said before, it is not about the propriety of whether the information was relevant to a serious investigation, it was that a step wasn't taken that should have been. How, by its nature, can the public not have an eroded confidence in the system if these sort of unlawful breaches are going to happen?The public will make their own judgements on the fact that this is a very thin, narrow wedge of metadata law relating to journalists. I have been on the record many times saying that it is extremely rare that we are interested in a journalist's metadata but it's not rare that we use metadata on nearly all of our investigations. It is a very common tool we use. The Ombudsman regularly inspects the Australian Federal Police's compliance with that. We regularly come up very well in the compliance inspections.In terms of how the information is obtained, do the police go to the telecommunications company and say "We want details relating to this number"?The Act prescribes how we do it. There is many hundreds of providers of phone services now in Australia and once we identify which provider, we make a request under the Act to that provider.The fact you said you will go back and look at some other instances, I think - We have looked at them, yes. Indicating you have accessed journalists' metadata before?No, we looked at other investigations of a similar nature that involved unauthorised release. We have not breached. I think I have been on the record as saying we have also not had any journalist information warrants sought.When did you disclose it to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, sorry?The 25th - 26 April. Two days ago.Do you think people's confidence in the system is shattered, you have broken the law investigating one of your own for a leak?I hope the confidence isn't shattered because this is routine that we use metadata as a common part of police investigations across the country. I think we have been found to be very compliant. We have breached in respect of a journalist's particular circumstances on this occasion. I don't think that gives cause to say that the public should have their confidence shattered in the system. When did the first investigation start into the journalist?I don't know when it started. It goes back several months. The actual breach occurred earlier this year, though. Just on the other -Yes.Can you explain how your deradicalisation unit didn't have full access to a car in Sydney?I can, actually. That report, which I read with interest this morning, was very much out of context. That report related to material released in an FOI about the setting up of our team in the very early stages when the team was being set up. I think anyone would expect that with the establishment of any new area, members are going to ask for certain resources and those resources were provided. I have sought assurances again today to make sure that team has all the resources it needs, including a car, and has had since it was established.How long did it go on for there was no access to the car in Sydney?I don't know. It would have been simply in the process of setting up. We have a lot of cars in the AFP. I don't think any team or officer doesn't have access to a vehicle.Are you adequately resourced then? Do you need more resources for those teams?That's a discussion I have with government all the time. Counter-terrorism matters and all matters relating to counter-terrorism are a priority. We move resources to the priorities and counter-terrorism is a priority so I'm satisfied we are applying the right resources to counter-terrorism.You have enough resources for those teams?Yes.On the topic of counter-terrorism, three Australians based in Beirut - (SPEAKS INDISTINCTLY) I saw those reports this morning. We have good relationships with the Lebanese authorities. It should be no surprise to anybody, the Government and ourselves have said we are concerned about Australians in the conflict zone and it should also be no surprise they will occasionally, potentially, turn up in neighbouring countries. I'm not going to confirm or deny anything about the three that were reported this morning though. Thank you.

That was the Australian Federal Police Police Commissioner Andrew Colvin confirming there had been a metadata breach. The Commissioner called it a human error. The AFP earlier had mistakenly published highly sensitive information including metadata connected to criminal investigations that are ongoing. Commissioner Colvin says, as a result, the AFP will be reviewing their practices to ensure there are no future breaches. Let's move on to other news now, funding for roads, rail and other major infrastructure projects is expected to be fast-tracked in next week's Budget. The ABC understands that much of the $50 billion infrastructure plan for last year's Budget will be brought forward. Joining me now is Shadow Minister for Infrastructure Anthony Albanese. Good to be with you.It sounds like great news, you must welcome it.Of course there is no $50 billion program. That's a fantasy. The fact is Budgets Estimates show it's actually $34 billion is the real figure. What we have seen is a decline in infrastructure investment so if further infrastructure investment occurs in the next fortnight's Budget, we would welcome it. They could start by funding projects like Brisbane's cross-river rail, Melbourne's metro project that were all approved by Infrastructure Australia and funded way back in the 2013 Budget before they were cut. They could fund Perth's MetroNet project. Rail for western Sydney including through Badgerys Creek and Adelaide's light rail project ready to go and approved by Infrastructure Australia as well. We want to see the reality rather than the rhetoric.Before we get to the particular projects and what's going on with them, it does seem the Government seems to be sidelining the states in regards to boosting the infrastructure? We have seen the Treasurer Scott Morrison says the Government gets involved "Where we think we can invest in infrastructure that has national productivity lifting outcome and benefit"? Do you agree with sidelining the States?They've sidelined proper process in Infrastructure Australia. They haven't sidelined the States. They have sidelined States that have the temerity to elect Labor governments. Victoria, with 25% of the population, receives 7.7% of the national infrastructure budget. That's in spite of the fact Melbourne is Australia's fastest-growing city. The fact that Victoria is a fast-growing State in terms of its population. The fact that projects like the M80 road project in Melbourne, the outer ring road, was cut in the 2014 Budget and put back in last year. The Melbourne metro project is absolutely essential. They haven't put a dollar into that project. I think the problem here is that Scott Morrison has sidelined proper process by taking funding away from projects that had been approved by Infrastructure Australia, that were ready to go, in favour of projects like Perth freight link and the East West Link in Victoria that frankly didn't stack up. That's what explains the 20% decline in infrastructure investment over the first two years of this Government. He does say the projects they will be focusing on is national productivity-lifting outcome and benefit. He says it is for the good of the country rather than the good of the States.The truth is that state governments run our road network and our rail networks. There are very few projects that are purely national. The Badgerys Creek Airport, of course, is one of those. The inland rail project that they've done nothing on for four years is another one. But if that is an excuse, they are setting up rhetoric here, to pretend they are doing something when actually they are not investing in road and rail, then that will be a tragedy. The Government is setting up an infrastructure financing unit in the Department of Prime Minister and contact. That's the job that Infrastructure Australia was set up to do. To identify and to support productivity-boosting
infrastructure. If anything shows the Government's failure on infrastructure and infrastructure, it's the fact that they stopped the rollout of the National Broadband Network being fibre-to-the home and business and, instead, rolling out copper to millions of homes, which is really - that's last-century or the century-before-last technology. They need to get with the program. They've started to at least acknowledge, after years of going on about debt and how debt's all bad, now they are saying there's good debt and bad debt. That's because, of course, the deficit has increased by so much on their watch.I want to take you up on the issue of good debt and bad debt. Treasurer Scott Morrison has been talking about it. Is it just a case of moving one issue and one project from one column to another column? Is that what's happening?That appears to be what it is. It's just the government, essentially, softening its arguments. For years they've argued that debt is all bad. Now they're changing. It appears their argument really is, when Labor is in government, debt is bad but when they are in government and have doubled it, debt somehow is good.I will take you up on something else Scott Morrison said. He said to rack up government debt to pay for welfare payments, Medicare costs or other everyday expenses is not a good idea. What's your reaction to that?Look, there is a distinction to be drawn between Infrastructure investment that produces a return and current expenditure by the Government. Drawing a distinction in the budget papers, there is an argument for that. But you've got to invest in the right projects. The Reserve Bank Governors have been very clear about that. The current one and his predecessor Glenn Stevens. They have been very clear you get to -- you need to get proper advice from Infrastructure Australia. Otherwise it is a case this Government hasn't invested in the right projects. Malcolm Turnbull likes taking selfies on trains, he just hasn't funded any train lines. The Coalition is talking about boosting infrastructure, getting more projects on. Labor is having a push-back. The West-East gas pipeline. The Federal Government is proposing the West-East gas pipeline. One, is this a feasible project? The fact that WA's new Premier Mark McGowan says he will use the proposal as a bargaining chip for higher GST. Why use it as a bargaining chip when, really, it's a project that will benefit the nation?Mark McGowan is quite frustrated as the WA Premier because he knows he has seen a government pluck out the Roe 8 road project as the only project they've funded in WA, only new project, in four years and it's a dud project. He has abandoned it. But for four years, that is all they've gone on about since the 2014 Budget. He knows WA has just seen Coalition Government Ministers come and open projects like Gateway WA, the Great Eastern Highway, the Esperance Port access road, the projects funded by the former federal Labor Government and pretend they are new. In some cases they have changed the names of projects. The Swan Valley bypass became North Link. He wants investment in WA. He is frustrated by the fact that the Coalition has abandoned WA. That's one of the reasons why he is the Premier because State and Federal, the Coalition weren't delivering for the people of WAI want to get a quick response from you about the AFP admitting there had been a metadata breach in their system. What's your response to that?There has to be a proper investigation of how this occurred. Any breach of data such as this is a very serious issue. I will await the proper processes but I think people are entitled to believe that the legislation, when it was carried to allow for access for appropriate authorities to meta data, will be kept confidential and it will be used appropriately. Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, very appreciate you taking your time to speak with us. Good to be with you.That's the latest for ABC News. I'm Fauziah Ibrahim. Thanks for watching. Stay with us, we will have more at the top of the hour.

This program is not captioned.

This program is not captioned.

This program is not captioned.