The Federal Government is pushing for new powers that would allow it to release a veteran's personal information should it wish to correct public statements.

Key points: The new laws appear to indicate a push to ensure the Government can legally publicly respond to people they believe are deliberately misleading the public

The new laws appear to indicate a push to ensure the Government can legally publicly respond to people they believe are deliberately misleading the public The legislation has support from both major parties

The legislation has support from both major parties Veterans Affairs Minister Dan Tehan dismissed the criticism, saying the bill passed after three months of public exposure

Lawyers told the ABC they were worried the new laws, which quietly passed the House of Representatives on Thursday with bipartisan support, were designed to silence public criticism of the Government.

The concerns came after Labor referred Human Services Minister Alan Tudge to the Australian Federal Police to determine whether providing a journalist with a welfare recipient's personal information was legal.

The veterans' affairs legislation places stricter conditions on the release of personal information and makes it clear any breach of protocol will be considered a criminal offence.

But the bill appears to indicate a new push to ensure the Government has the legal capability to publicly respond to those they believe are deliberately misleading the public.

The legislation would give the department secretary the power to disclose otherwise protected information about veterans, provided they obtain a public interest certificate.

The secretary must also notify the veteran in writing of an intention to disclose the information and provide them with an opportunity to object.

"This power is accompanied by appropriate safeguards including that the power cannot be delegated by the secretary to anyone," the bill's explanatory memorandum said. "The secretary must act in accordance with the rules that the minister makes [and] the minister cannot delegate his or her rule making power."

'An appalling breach of privacy'

While the department must consider the veterans' response, it can still release the information without their approval.

Bureaucrats must comply with these requirements or they may be charged with a criminal offence punishable by 60 penalty units ($10,800).

Although the legislation has support from both major parties, Labor-linked law firm Slater and Gordon claimed the amendments were "an appalling breach of privacy".

The firm's military compensation expert Brian Briggs said the legislation was "a gross abuse of power and insulting to members of the defence force".

"This will deter defence force personnel with serious physical and psychological injuries from speaking freely and frankly with their doctors for fear that it will be made public," he said.

Veterans Affairs Minister Dan Tehan has dismissed the criticism and said the bill passed the House of Representatives after three months of public exposure, two Senate committees and cross-party consultation.

"The Government took on board all suggestions and recommendations throughout this process," Mr Tehan said.

"The bill has also undergone a privacy impact assessment."

Labor has 'serious concerns'

Labor's Shadow Veteran Affairs Minister Amanda Rishworth said while the Opposition had supported the legislation, it now had "serious concerns".

Ms Rishworth told the ABC politicians were still working on the accompanying instrument that enacts the legislation.

"That instrument hasn't been tabled, and if we're not satisfied with the protections in that instrument then that instrument is able to be disallowed," she said.

Ms Rishworth said Labor would be seeking assurances from Mr Tehan.

"What's come to light over recent days seems to be that the Government can't be trusted with personal information and therefore I will be wanting to speak to the minister," she said.

"There are protections, but what we've seen with Alan Tudge is the fact that he's flouted those rules, in my belief, and certainly the shadow minister's belief. He may have actually broken the rules."

Loading...