Prime minister urges Labor to support bill with new amendment requiring agencies to get a warrant before accessing journalists’ metadata to identify a source

This article is more than 5 years old

This article is more than 5 years old

The prime minister has agreed to Labor demands that agencies be required to get a warrant to access journalists’ metadata for the purpose of identifying a source.



Media companies and journalists had strongly opposed access without a warrant. The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, wrote to Tony Abbott over the weekend saying Labor reserved the right to move additional amendments to protect journalists’ sources when parliament considered new laws forcing telecommunications companies to store customers’ metadata for two years.

In a letter to Shorten late on Monday, Abbott revealed that he had “decided that a further amendment be moved that will require agencies to obtain a warrant to access a journalist’s metadata for the purpose of identifying a source”.

“The government does not believe that this is necessary but is proposing to accept it to expedite the bill,” Abbott wrote.

Abbott asked Shorten to guarantee by 5pm that Labor would support the metadata laws with that amendment, and that it would support procedural motions to allow the laws to pass both houses of parliament by the end of next week.

Shorten replied that the opposition would support passage of the bill “subject to the text of the amendment being agreed”.

“I note you have not provided a copy of the amendments yet,” Shorten told Abbott. “I recommend the government consult with Australian media organisations in finalising the text of any agreement.”

But the union representing journalists said the prime minister’s proposal remained inadequate. The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance said the addition of a hurdle such as a warrant did not change the fact that agencies would be able to use reporters’ metadata to pursue a whistleblowers.

“Accessing metadata to hunt down journalists’ sources, regardless of the procedures used, threatens press freedom and democracy,” said the alliance’s chief executive, Paul Murphy.”

“It means important stories in the public interest can be silenced before they ever become known, and whistleblowers can be persecuted and prosecuted.”

Murphy said journalists would “be forced to use the tools of counter-surveillance such as anonymisation and encryption to protect their sources”.

The prime minister’s national security adviser, Andrew Shearer, the Australian Federal Police commissioner, Andrew Colvin, and advisers to the attorney general and the communications minister have been briefing media companies about the proposed laws and have met very strong resistance to the provisions of the data retention bill applying to journalists.

“I encourage you to join the government in ensuring that the capabilities of our agencies are not further degraded and they have the tools they need to keep Australia safe,” Abbott wrote to Shorten.

Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said he would believe the government’s promise when he saw the detail.

“It will be very interesting how they define who a journalist is and how this will work in practice,” he said.

“We still don’t think the debate on this legislation should proceed until those questions have all been answered.”

Abbott confirmed the concession a short time after the attorney general, George Brandis, defended the adequacy of the government’s previous stance.

During Senate question time on Monday, Brandis rejected Ludlam’s suggestion that the legislation posed “a threat to investigative journalism” and said the government had already agreed to a three-month review of the issue.

“In responding to that recommendation the government noted that Australia’s existing legal framework is founded on robust principles that provide fair and equal treatment of all subject to its laws. The same laws, Senator Ludlam, apply to all citizens and they ought to apply equally,” Brandis said.

“This issue was addressed; it was addressed in a bipartisan fashion. It was the subject of two bipartisan recommendations, both of which have been adopted by the government.”

Media executives are scheduled to appear before a parliamentary inquiry to express their concerns about the new laws on Friday.