Submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security inquiry into the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Act 2018 8 February 2019 Pirate Party Australia would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to comment on the review of the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amend- ment (Assistance and Access) Act 2018 (the Act). We doubt any Government or Opposition politician will actually pay attention. After all, there were over 14,000 submissions relating to the Act last year, almost all critical, and yet it was cynically rushed through Parliament with massive deficiencies, including what appear to be outright drafting errors. The Pirate Party commends the Law Council (in submission no. 4) for outlining these deficiencies (as well as the few improvements) in excruciating detail. The most serious problems are also outlined in submission no. 5, by Dr. Chris Culnane and A/Prof. Vanessa Teague. The ”#AABill” has quickly become internationally infamous in the technology sec- tor and is causing serious concerns about the trustworthiness of both Australian software and Australian software engineers. It’s particularly astonishing that this law has been enacted after all the fuss over Huawei hardware not being used in the NBN, over concerns of being comprom- ised by the Chinese government. Does the Australian Government have no self- awareness whatsoever? Are we incapable of not enthusiastically copying others’ mistakes? We concur with Dr. Culnane and A/Prof Teague that this law is so flawed, mere amendments are insufficient. Recommendation: Repeal the Act. Ditch it. Start over. With luck, the few worthwhile provisions and some of our software industry’s lost reputation will be salvageable. About Pirate Party Australia Pirate Party Australia is a political party based around the core tenets of freedom of information and culture, civil and digital liberties, privacy and anonymity, government transparency, and participatory democracy. It formed in 2008, and is part of an international movement that began in Sweden in 2006. Pirate Parties have been elected to all levels of government worldwide. 2.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

1 the European Court of Justice Case of Breyer Mr. Alan S. Reid Sheffield
The European Court of Justice case of Breyer Mr. Alan S. Reid Sheffield Hallam University Abstract This case note analyses the impact and significance of the European Court of Justice decision in Breyer. The European Court of Justice has expanded the definition of personal data to include dynamic IP addresses. The judgment improves the privacy situation of internet users across the European Union. The facts of Breyer1 Patrick Breyer is a German politician and activist who belongs to the Pirate Party. The Pirate Party was originally set up in Sweden in 2006, as a single issue political party, committed to the modernisation of copyright law in Sweden, following the crackdown on The Pirate Bay peer-to-peer network. After limited success in Sweden, sister parties sprung up across Europe, in order to capitalise on the notoriety of The Pirate Bay. In order to broaden their appeal, the European Pirate Parties set out common themes of campaigning interest, in particular, on issues surrounding the internet, such as open access to information, freedom of expression and privacy. As a technophile and politician committed to internet freedoms, Patrick Breyer vociferously objected to various Federal German government websites retaining details of his dynamic Internet Protocol (IP) address after he had completed browsing. Internet Protocol (IP) addresses are the essential backbone of the internet. Internet protocols are the method by which interconnected computers and devices communicate, share and transfer data between themselves. An IP address consists of either four pairs of numbers (version 4)2 separated by three colons or eight pairs of numbers separated by six colons (version 6).3 The US organisation ICANN4, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering, is tasked with overseeing the interconnectivity and compatibility required for the continued successful operation of the internet infrastructure.
[Show full text]
PL&B International
ANALYSIS European Union court rules that IP addresses are personal data The Breyer case, another landmark ruling on key data protection notions, covers the definition of personal data in relation to dynamic IP addresses and the “legitimate interest” legal basis for data processing. By Monika Kuschewsky . he Court of Justice of the EU only temporarily assigned and change website was accessed, or that of another (CJEU) has yet again issued an each time there is a new connection person who might use that computer. important ruling, interpreting from a computer or device to the Inter - The CJEU then considered whether Tkey notions of the EU Data Protection net. Website operators (as opposed to dynamic IP addresses may be treated as Directive (the Directive) in its recent Internet service providers, ISPs) do not personal data relating to an “identifi - judgement of 19 October 2016 in the usually possess all the information to able natural person”, who can be iden - Case Patrick Breyer vs. Bundesrepub - identify the users behind the IP tified indirectly. In interpreting this lik Deutschland (C -582/14). In particu - address. provision, the CJEU made two lar, the CJEU answered two questions, Though initially dismissed by a important statements: namely: (1) whether dynamic IP lower court, the case was brought • first, “it is not necessary that that addresses constitute personal data for before Germany’s highest civil court information alone allows the data website operators and (2) concerning (the Bundesgerichtshof or BGH), subject to be identified;” and, the permissible scope of Member which referred two questions for a pre - • second, “it is not required that all States’ implementing legislation con - liminary ruling to the CJEU.
[Show full text]
ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
[Show full text]
'We Want Artists to Be Fully and Fairly Paid for Their Work'
Ananay Aguilar ‘We want Artists to be Fully and Fairly Paid for their Work’ Discourses on Fairness in the Neoliberal European Copyright Reform by Ananay Aguilar* Abstract: Elaborating on the President of the right reform—I shed light on the powerful discourses European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker’s agenda, on fairness that have dominated and shaped the re- EC Vice-President and Commissioner for the Digi- form process. Using discourse analysis, I found the tal Single Market Andrus Ansip wrote on his blog on concept of fairness to be mostly dependent on the 18th November 2015, “we want artists to be fully and stakeholders’ relative bargaining power and framed fairly paid for their work”—the phrase that serves as by hegemonic neo-liberal thought. Drawing on inter- the title to this article and that has reappeared in dif- views, fieldwork, media, and the documentation pro- ferent guises throughout the process of EU copy- duced by the European Union’s government through- right reform. By examining a case study on the Fair out the process, the case study also illustrates the Internet for Performers Campaign—a campaign ad- contested nature of copyright reform today. vanced in the context of the ongoing European copy- Keywords: Fairness; discourse analysis; copyright reform; EU; neo-liberalism © 2018 Ananay Aguilar Everybody may disseminate this article by electronic means and make it available for download under the terms and conditions of the Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL). A copy of the license text may be obtained at http://nbn-resolving. de/urn:nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8.
[Show full text]
Challenger Party List
Appendix List of Challenger Parties Operationalization of Challenger Parties A party is considered a challenger party if in any given year it has not been a member of a central government after 1930. A party is considered a dominant party if in any given year it has been part of a central government after 1930. Only parties with ministers in cabinet are considered to be members of a central government. A party ceases to be a challenger party once it enters central government (in the election immediately preceding entry into office, it is classified as a challenger party). Participation in a national war/crisis cabinets and national unity governments (e.g., Communists in France’s provisional government) does not in itself qualify a party as a dominant party. A dominant party will continue to be considered a dominant party after merging with a challenger party, but a party will be considered a challenger party if it splits from a dominant party. Using this definition, the following parties were challenger parties in Western Europe in the period under investigation (1950–2017). The parties that became dominant parties during the period are indicated with an asterisk. Last election in dataset Country Party Party name (as abbreviation challenger party) Austria ALÖ Alternative List Austria 1983 DU The Independents—Lugner’s List 1999 FPÖ Freedom Party of Austria 1983 * Fritz The Citizens’ Forum Austria 2008 Grüne The Greens—The Green Alternative 2017 LiF Liberal Forum 2008 Martin Hans-Peter Martin’s List 2006 Nein No—Citizens’ Initiative against
[Show full text]
The Risks of Discrimination of Biometric Mass Surveillance
en Event | 03.12.2020 | 16:00 - 17:15 The Risks of Discrimination of Biometric Mass Surveillance Live Webinar - Register here! Throughout the European Union, governments are experimenting with highly intrusive systems of facial recognition and other biometric mass surveillance in public spaces. At the same time, there has been a global uproar against the usage of these technologies due to their alarming consequences for fundamental rights, fuelling mass surveillance and racial discrimination. In the united states, lawmakers have already started to impose strong legislations that ban the use of these technologies. The Greens/EFA Group in the European Parliament therefore calls on the European Commission to equally acknowledge the adverse effect of biometric surveillance methods on our fundamental rights, and to impose a ban of biometric mass surveillance technologies in the European Union. Together with international experts, we want to discuss with you about the harmful effects of biometric mass surveillance and the ways through which these technologies amplify racial discrimination and exclusion in our societies. Programme 16:00 – 16:05 Introduction by MEP Patrick Breyer (Pirate Party, Greens/EFA) 16:05 – 16:50 Panel Discussion with Experts on Surveillance, Human Rights, Race and Tech 16:50 – 17:00 Q&A with audience 17:00 – 17:05 Concluding Remarks by MEP Kim van Sparrentak (GroenLinks , Greens/EFA) EXPERTS Mutale Nkonde is an AI Policy advisor of the UN, member of the Tik Tok Advisory Board and CEO of AI for the People, a nonprofit communications firm that seeks to change tech neutrality narratives. Prior to this, Nkonde worked in AI Governance.
[Show full text]
European Election Study 2014 EES 2014 Voter Study First Post-Electoral Study
European Election Study 2014 EES 2014 Voter Study First Post-Electoral Study Release Notes Sebastian Adrian Popa Hermann Schmitt Sara B Hobolt Eftichia Teperoglou Original release 1 January 2015 MZES, University of Mannheim Acknowledgement of the data Users of the data are kindly asked to acknowledge use of the data by always citing both the data and the accompanying release document. How to cite this data: Schmitt, Hermann; Popa, Sebastian A.; Hobolt, Sara B.; Teperoglou, Eftichia (2015): European Parliament Election Study 2014, Voter Study. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5160 Data file Version 2.0.0, doi:10.4232/1. 12300 and Schmitt H, Hobolt SB and Popa SA (2015) Does personalization increase turnout? Spitzenkandidaten in the 2014 European Parliament elections. European Union Politics, Online first available for download from: http://eup.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/06/03/1465116515584626.full How to cite this document: Sebastian Adrian Popa, Hermann Schmitt, Sara B. Hobolt, and Eftichia Teperoglou (2015) EES 2014 Voter Study Advance Release Notes. Mannheim: MZES, University of Mannheim. Acknowledgement of assistance The 2014 EES voter study was funded by a consortium of private foundations under the leadership of Volkswagen Foundation (the other partners are: Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Stiftung Mercator, Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian). It profited enormously from to synergies that emerged from the co-operation with the post-election survey funded by the European Parliament. Last but certainly not least, it benefited from the generous support of TNS Opinion who did the fieldwork in all the 28 member countries . The study would not have been possible the help of many colleagues, both members of the EES team and country experts form the wider academic community, who spent valuable time on the questionnaire and study preparation, often at very short notice.
[Show full text]
Exploring Female Athletes' Body Perceptions
SQUEEZING IN: EXPLORING FEMALE ATHLETES’ BODY PERCEPTIONS Mallory E. Mann A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2015 Committee: Vikki Krane, Advisor Dafina-Lazarus Stewart Graduate Faculty Representative Nancy Spencer Dryw Dworsky ii ABSTRACT Vikki Krane, Advisor Much attention has been paid to female college athlete body image over the last three decades. However, relatively few inquiries employed a holistic approach that examined the myriad of interrelated sociocultural and personal factors influencing athletes’ body perceptions. The primary purpose of the current study was to explore female college athletes’ body image in both social and sport settings. A secondary purpose was to investigate the sociocultural context and how it influenced athletes’ body perceptions. Finally, this study sought to understand the ways in which female athletes’ social identities helped explain their body-related behaviors. Feminist and intersectional methodological approaches guided this inquiry to create partial, in- depth understandings of how female athletes think about and relate to their physiques. The study is particularly unique in its commitment to representing multiple, diverse stories from athletes without privileging one type of body perception. Using an intersectional methodology contextualized athletes body descriptions to uncover deeper meanings and underlying factors. Twenty female college athletes participated in unstructured interviews. These athletes represented eight different varsity sports at NCAA Division I, II, and III institutions. This study offers a new perspective on the relationship between motivational team climate and female athlete body image. While task-oriented team climates still appear to serve as a protective factor against body disturbances among athletes, findings also indicated that a team’s obsession with the body seemed more closely tied to body image issues than a team’s goal orientation.
[Show full text]
Codebook CPDS I 1960-2013
1 Codebook: Comparative Political Data Set, 1960-2013 Codebook: COMPARATIVE POLITICAL DATA SET 1960-2013 Klaus Armingeon, Christian Isler, Laura Knöpfel, David Weisstanner and Sarah Engler The Comparative Political Data Set 1960-2013 (CPDS) is a collection of political and institu- tional data which have been assembled in the context of the research projects “Die Hand- lungsspielräume des Nationalstaates” and “Critical junctures. An international comparison” directed by Klaus Armingeon and funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. This data set consists of (mostly) annual data for 36 democratic OECD and/or EU-member coun- tries for the period of 1960 to 2013. In all countries, political data were collected only for the democratic periods.1 The data set is suited for cross-national, longitudinal and pooled time- series analyses. The present data set combines and replaces the earlier versions “Comparative Political Data Set I” (data for 23 OECD countries from 1960 onwards) and the “Comparative Political Data Set III” (data for 36 OECD and/or EU member states from 1990 onwards). A variable has been added to identify former CPDS I countries. For additional detailed information on the composition of government in the 36 countries, please consult the “Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set – Government Com- position 1960-2013”, available on the CPDS website. The Comparative Political Data Set contains some additional demographic, socio- and eco- nomic variables. However, these variables are not the major concern of the project and are thus limited in scope. For more in-depth sources of these data, see the online databases of the OECD, Eurostat or AMECO.
[Show full text]
The Pirate Party and New Politics in OECD Countries Matt Hastings Political Science Jennifer Fitzgerald
Politics as Unusual: The Pirate Party and New Politics in OECD Countries Matt Hastings Political Science Jennifer Fitzgerald: Thesis Advisor Committee Members: Andy Baker: Political Science Jennifer Fitzgerald: Political Science David Spires: History University of Colorado, Boulder April 4, 2011 Politics as Unusual: Matt Hastings 1 Abstract: Standard bearer left and right parties, the customary powers for over a century, are under siege from new political movements that range from green and animal rights parties to a resurgent radical right. One piece of this new politics movement is a party that began in Sweden. Focusing on intellectual property rights and technology, specifically the internet, the Pirate Party of Sweden achieved representation in the European Parliament in June of 2009. This success has lead to the emergence of other Pirate Parties across Europe and even Canada. This paper seeks to answer what domestic factors would result in individuals forming and voting for Pirate Parties, a small piece of this new politics movement. Analysis is done using logistic regressions of variables corresponding to four schools of thought. After the data is analyzed, the evidence points to the Pirate Party being the result of electoral structural (the effective number of parties) and the culmination of values change in the 34 OECD countries. Now and then we had a hope that if we lived and were good, God would permit us to be pirates. Mark Twain, from Life on the Mississippi Politics as Unusual: Matt Hastings 2 I. Introduction: Puzzling Politics There are tremors in the electoral systems of many modern democracies. Outside of Europe, the most recent midterm elections in the United States saw the emergence of the fiscally minded Tea Party carve itself out of the Republican Party, creating a new movement for conservatives to consider in Washington (Barstow 2010).
[Show full text]
California Pirate Party
ALEX PADILLA | SECRETARY OF STATE | STATE OF CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS DIVISION th th 1500 11 Street, 5 Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814 | Tel 916.657.2166 | Fax 916.653.3214 | www.sos.ca.gov March 24, 2017 County Clerk/Registrar of Voters (CC/ROV) Memorandum #17028 TO: All County Clerks/Registrars of Voters FROM: /s/ Mike Somers Elections Analyst RE: Political Body: California Pirate Party Pursuant to Elections Code section 5002, this notice serves to inform you that on March 8, 2017, the Secretary of State received formal notification from the California Pirate Party of their intent to qualify for the June 5, 2018, Primary Election as a political party. Attached is a list of the current qualified parties and political bodies attempting to qualify for the June 5, 2018 Primary Election and the codes to be used when entering registrations in your election management systems (EMS). Once we update the political body’s status to “attempting to qualify” in VoteCal, it will automatically be updated in your EMS. If you have any questions, please give me a call at (916) 695-1563. Attachment cc: Orion Steele, Jorge Mora VOTECAL CODE DESCRIPTIONS (CCROV #17028) Qualified Political Parties Code Description AI American Independent Party DEM Democratic Party GRN Green Party LIB Libertarian Party PF Peace and Freedom Party REP Republican Party NPP No Party Preference OTH Other Political Bodies Attempting to Qualify for June 5, 2018 Primary Election Code Description PFJ The People for Justice CPC Constitution Party of California AMS American Solidarity Party of California PP Progressive Party CNP California National Party OP Open Party PIR California Pirate Party Political Bodies Attempting to Qualify for November 3, 2020 General Election Code Description NEW New America Political Party GGP Good Government Party .
[Show full text]
Background Note the British German Forum This Background Note Provides Some Basic Information on the British and German Political Systems
British German Forum A smarter Europe: cooperation, competition, and innovation in the 2020s Sunday 13 – Thursday 17 July 2014 | WP1320 In association with: Supported by: British Embassy, Berlin Foreign and Commonwealth Office Background note The British German Forum This background note provides some basic information on the British and German political systems. A table at the back of the document (section 3) summarises some relevant data. The overall note comprises:1 1. Germany Governing architecture Local government Legislature Federal electoral system Federal government Political parties at the federal level Bundestag parties Other significant parties 2. United Kingdom Governing architecture Devolution Local government – county and city councils Legislature National electoral system UK government Political parties in the UK parliament The government and the opposition Significant parties without seats in the House of Commons 3. Germany and the UK compared: key figures & education systems 4. ‘Smartness’ in the EU Acknowledgements and caveats Any opinions expressed in this document are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Wilton Park, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or the UK Government. Comments and suggestions can be sent to [email protected]. Alexandra Craven, Wilton Park June 2014. 1 If reading this electronically: each heading in the contents page is hyperlinked to the appropriate part of the document. 2 Germany Governing architecture Germany’s democratic system is based on the 1949 constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany), otherwise known as the Grundgesetz or Basic Law. Upon reunification of the two Germanys in 1990, the former East German states acceded to West Germany and adopted the Basic Law.
[Show full text]