The federal government will seek to introduce legislation giving Australian intelligence agencies new powers and to create a new offence for when intelligence officers take material without appropriate authorisation.



The attorney general, George Brandis, told a Coalition party meeting on Tuesday the first part of the government’s intelligence legislation would be introduced this week. He said the package would relate mostly to the recommendations in chapter four of the joint parliamentary committee on intelligence and security inquiry.



The package will also seek to introduce a new offence when the government is aware intelligence material has been taken but there are difficulties proving it has been disclosed to a third party. Guardian Australia understands the legislation will be introduced on Wednesday.



On Monday Labor MP Anthony Byrne, who is currently the deputy chair of the joint intelligence and security committee, said he had “grave concerns” about the “inevitability in this country an event will occur on this soil of the magnitude of the Bali event, or just a terrorism event”.



He called on the government to introduce the “full suite” of recommendations in a major JISC report into intelligence agencies.



“If a government is concerned ... and is making the right noises about being concerned about this nation’s security it must give its agencies all of the suites of the powers that it needs to deal with the terrorist threat, and it has not done so,” he said.



“So I would urge the attorney general … to bring all of the suites that the powers of the intelligence agencies have been asking for for some period of time.”



Byrne also called on the government to consider mandatory data retention, and said legislation should be introduced sooner so that the public’s views could be taken into account.



“I don’t want to see data retention debated in this chamber and the chamber below after an event has occurred on Australia’s soil,” he said.



“Powers of this magnitude need appropriate consideration so the citizenry’s view can be taken into account. It is vital that these powers be brought before the parliament sooner rather than later.”



Greens senator Scott Ludlam said data retention was a “rather creepy proposal that’s being advanced under more legitimate lines of argument”.



But he added that it was unclear where Labor stood on data retention, and said the Greens would fight an attempt to bring forward a data retention regime.



“I’m honestly not sure where Labor has landed on data retention,” he said.



“It’s not really clear what Mr Byrne is referring to last night. Until the attorney general actually shows his hand.. we won’t really know where people stand.”



The joint intelligence committee report did not endorse a mandatory data retention scheme for telephone companies and internet service providers to hold on to customers’ details. It said: “There is a diversity of views within the committee as to whether there should be a mandatory data retention regime. This is ultimately a decision for government.”



Civil liberties groups across Australia have also cautioned the government on introducing intelligence reforms without sufficient consultation.



In a rare joint statement, the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, Liberty Victoria,



the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties, the SA Council for Civil and Civil Liberties Australia urged the government to allow proper scrutiny for the anticipated legislation.

“There is no urgency that overrides a proper parliamentary and public review process … this is notwithstanding an apparent scare campaign over recent weeks to link the ‘Jihadist’ element of the Middle East conflict and the involvement of some Australians with an urgent need for the immediate passage of expanded national security laws.”



The statement said some of the recommendations believed to be introduced tomorrow – including broader powers for Asio to access computer networks and new surveillance powers for Asio, ASD and Digo – raised major concerns.



“Such provisions will provide further ‘exceptional’ powers to Asio and blur the current cleardemarcation between the role of Asio and the other foreign oriented intelligence agencies,” it said.

“In the light of the Snowden revelations about the consequences of these kinds of powers and intelligence sharing relationships in the USA and elsewhere, Australians would be wise to insist on very careful scrutiny of these proposals before endorsing them.”