March 2015 — We lost the battle but we can still bear witness to what the legislators have said versus what the experts on data security have said and hold both sides to account. Time will tell, it always does.

Proponents of Australia’s mass data retention legislation have argued:

The data is essential to catching terrorists. The data will only be used to catch terrorists. The data will never be accessed improperly by a rogue employee. The data will never be accessed improperly by a rogue public servant or security agency employee. The data set collected will be in the legislation, not defined by regulation. The data will be safely secured and will never be compromised. The data cannot and will never be used to tell which web-pages and web-services your computer has accessed. The law will never be used to expose whistle-blowers. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. That overseas rulings that mass surveillance violates human rights are irrelevant in the Australian context or are flawed or wrong. The law applies to everyone equally.

Opponents of Australia’s mass data retention legislation have argued: