Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Mr McCORMACK (Riverina) (18:04): Anything that can make Australia's telecommunications even more watertight—the security thereof—has to be commended and supported, and the coalition does support the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It's important legislation. As you've just heard from the member for Goldstein, our national security is vital.

Obviously, what we need to do in the space of child exploitation through sex trafficking, particularly in the Philippines and South-East Asia, is crack on those nefarious characters who use telecommunications devices and other ways and means to do the wrong thing and to do great harm not only to children but, indeed, also to our nation's reputation. I know, from when I was the shadow minister for the Pacific and international development, that the greatest exploiters of child sex trafficking in these areas were Australians, and that is very sad to say; it is abhorrent.

Anything in this bill that can amend that, fix that, eradicate that has got to be seen as a good thing. There was recently an article on SmartCompany, written by Morganne Kopittke, in relation to investment and false-billing scams costing small businesses $25 million. In the very well-researched article, the journalist wrote that Australian small businesses have lost just over $25 million to scams in two years, with investment scams and false billing pinpointed as the biggest drains on their bank accounts.

You get this wrong image that criminal activity, when it is blue collar—if I could put it that way—is really bad but white-collar crime is in some way forgivable. In many ways, when you think about it, white-collar crime costs people their life savings, and it harms them—it sometimes even kills people—in other ways. In this article, the journalist wrote that a software company, Reckon, prepared some research.

It's an accounting firm. This report analysed scam data from micro- and small businesses using scam statistics provided upon request by the National Anti-Scam Centre. They found that small businesses lost $17.3 million in 2023, with 2,490 cases reported.

And the article says: From January 1 to November 30, 2024, business scams cost Australian small businesses $7.9 million with 1,707 reports made according to Reckon's report. I know that the former minister, the former assistant treasurer and member for Whitlam, who's now gone on to other things, did a lot of work in this regard. I applaud him for the efforts that he went to, to crack down on scams.

I know he headed up a very well-attended forum in Wagga Wagga, where he warned people of the white-collar crime that exists, particularly in the area of small business and especially targeting older Australians. These scams have become much slicker, much more professional and much more believable. Anything that we can do to prevent this has to be seen to be a good thing.

This report from SmartCompany says: For investment scams, small businesses saw a loss of more than $3.7 million, with 50 reports made, while false billing, which had 422 reports, recorded a loss of over $3.6 million. Speaking with SmartCompany, Reckon's chief executive officer, Sam Allert, said: … business scams cost Australia's small businesses millions each year— of course, that's an understatement, because they absolutely do— The financial and operational impact is often devastating, particularly for micro-businesses operating on tight margins.

That's what was reported. The quote that he gave was: Scammers are becoming more sophisticated, using AI-driven phishing attacks and business email compromise scams that can be difficult to detect. This makes cybersecurity no longer optional but essential … Small businesses must take a proactive approach by embedding cybersecurity into their daily operations.

Implementing two-factor authentication, regularly updating software, and training staff to recognise scam tactics are crucial first steps. But the difficulty, too, is that often you'll go onto a website that you need to access quickly—I know that this is the same for business—and you have to prove that you're a human. It's almost like the computers are taking over.

And you have to look at each of the squares and mark the number of umbrellas or cars or bus signs or whatever the case might be to prove that you're not a bot and to prove that, in fact, you are a real human being. I know it's another form of ensuring that you are what you say you are and who you say you are, but—I tell you what—it is frustrating. The article continues: Allert added that many businesses also overlook the importance of cyber insurance, which can provide a safety net in the event of a breach.

And, of course, we've seen some spectacularly bad breaches in recent times with companies now, because they didn't take the measures, didn't take the steps, didn't take the precautions, having to pay up big time to customers who were quite innocently—or perhaps, in some cases, stupidly—separated from their money. Allert said: Since email scams remain a common attack method, business owners must watch for red flags like unusual sender addresses, poor grammar, urgent requests, and emails impersonating trusted contacts.

Again, that's from the report. Allert then said: Establishing verification protocols for payments and sensitive requests can help prevent costly mistakes. Again, that's an understatement, but it's so true.

I want to commend the work that Bruce Billson has done as the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman in this particular area. I'm sorry that the government hasn't seen fit to increase his time with ASBFEO. I think it's a very good organisation; in fact, I know it's a very good organisation.

I also commend him for the work that he is doing in the area of small business, building on the work he did as the best small-business minister this parliament has seen. I say that with all due respect to other small-business ministers, including me, who have actually occupied that role—and I know Anne Aly is doing it at the moment. But it's a critical role.

It truly is. But, to this bill, we are supporting the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It ensures key provisions operate as intended, taking in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979, the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 and the Crimes Act from way back in 1914.

It flows from the government's decision to reconstitute the Home Affairs portfolio from the federal election. The decision to reconstitute the Home Affairs portfolio after the May election and the Prime Minister's recognition that there were issues with information sharing during the Dural caravan incident are an admission that the national security framework that he put in place by dismantling the Home Affairs portfolio failed, and it did so at a critical juncture.

It did. That has to be said. The federal government and the AFP need to work in with states and the various state police forces to ensure that, when we have incidents such as the Dural caravan incident, we absolutely get the information, we absolutely share it as much as possible with the public as soon as possible and we are upfront about it.

And I'm not quite sure, in that particular case, that everything happened that way. I have to say that what we've seen is, unfortunately, party and factional politics winning over common sense and public safety, and that is perhaps not the greatest outcome. The second schedule amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 to transfer the statutory function of the Communications Access Coordinator from the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department to the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs.

That might sound like it's perfunctory, but it's not. It is a major change and is seen by the government to be a necessary amendment and update. Schedule 3 amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 to permit limited access to stored communications to allow agencies to undertake development and testing activities in situations where they otherwise would have been authorised to intercept the same communication if they were still passing over a telecommunications system.

I want to point this out: we are served—and very well served—by some wonderful public servants in ASIO, in the AFP and in those surveillance organisations and departments. I've seen them at their best, and I know the member for New England has as well, in our capacities of being second in charge, each of us, of national security during times of government. We are well served, and we have to be.

We need to be, because there are bad actors, both overseas governments and overseas individuals, who will do Australia harm. They would and they do. The number of times that these bad actors have been prevented from doing us more harm has only been through absolute diligence.

These public servants, these surveillance agencies—AFP and ASIO and other people—are going out of their way to make sure that they undertake every stringent measure to make sure our public safety is No. 1, and I thank them for that. Schedule 4 is for the technical issue with the operation of interception of international production orders in the T(IA) Act. Schedule 5 amends the Crimes Act, which dates back to the First World War, to clarify the threshold for authorising and varying controlled operations and the circumstances in which a participant is protected from criminal responsibility and indemnified against civil liability.

They are necessary, perfunctory things that strengthen this particular legislation. The fifth schedule provides clarity around legal protection for officers involved in undercover operations targeted at taking down sexual abuse syndicates. As I said at the outset, clamping down on these people, identifying who they are and making sure that they are arrested either before they leave Australia or when they return to this country is of paramount importance, not only for the security of our nation but for the protection of those kids who they would seek to do harm to in other destinations, in other countries.

In the 2024-25 financial year, there were, according to the ACCCE Child Protection Triage Unit—and this is a sobering and devastating statistic—82,764 reports of online child sexual exploitation. That is nearly 83,000. That is gut wrenching.

That is sickening. That is so disturbing. This equates to an average of 226 reports per day.

To be honest, the penalties for this are probably nowhere near what they need to be. They should be strengthened, whether it's at the state or national level. These evildoers need to be weeded out and put behind bars—whatever it takes, to be honest.

These amendments in the overall legislation before the House ensure the law is fit for purpose going forward in addressing the most abhorrent online crimes where the persons under investigation are anonymised, including on the dark web and encrypted communications platforms, and that is good. That is absolutely encouraged. The coalition will always support sensible reforms which ensure that the men and women serving in intelligence agencies in Australia are given the best tools, the best support and the funding necessary.

They do a wonderful job, and we commend them for it.