Photographs of millions of Australians will be stored by the Immigration Department, and this "biometric data" gathering could extend to fingerprinting and iris scanning under the Abbott government's controversial counterterrorism laws.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The "foreign fighters" bill means there will be a major expansion of facial recognition imaging of Australians passing through international airports in a crackdown on passport fraud that could eventually apply to a wide range of biometric data – which could be shared with other government agencies.
Critics say the danger of such information being hacked is profound, given many personal electronic devices are now secured by fingerprints and iris scans.
The sheer scale of the personal information that would stream into the government's databanks is set to open one of the first fissures in the largely bipartisan approach to national security, with Labor warning that the legislation poses a danger to privacy.
"It's clear that this provision would be a significant expansion of biometric data collection by the government," shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said.
"Australians deserve a clear explanation from the government about what protections will be put in place to protect the privacy and security of their information."
The legislation specifically clears the way for all Australians as well as foreigners to be photographed when they leave Australia and when they return if they go through automated passport gates – which are set to become far more commonly used.
The department estimates that between 40 and 60 per cent of the 35 million travellers leaving and entering Australia each year would be photographed, many millions of them Australians.
The department can also share the biometric information for "specified purposes" according to the bill's explanatory memoranda, though it does not explain what these purposes are.
The foreign fighters bill is being scrutinised by the high-powered parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security before a vote expected by the end of the month.
It would allow the government to collect and store fingerprints and iris scans without needing to pass new laws. This could instead by done through regulations, which can be blocked only if opposition parties muster a majority of MPs in either house.
The Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, told a recent parliamentary hearing into the legislation that under the changes, the Department of Immigration and Border Protection would hold personal biometric information to an unprecedented "extent and volume".
The Immigration Department was rocked this year by an embarrassing data breach in which the personal details of nearly 10,000 asylum seekers were mistakenly made available on the department's website.
Underscoring the extent of security concerns, the growing biometrics database would be secured by the nation's top defence cyberspooks, the Australian Signals Directorate, according to testimony given by the department to the intelligence and security committee last week.
The ASD has indirectly suffered its own data breach recently in the case of renegade American intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, whose massive leaks of Western intelligence files involved some relating to the agency including, most spectacularly, details of Australian spying efforts against Indonesian leaders.
Privacy advocates are particularly worried about the consequences of biometric data being hacked because, unlike a passport or a tax file number, it cannot be changed.
"You can't readily change your fingerprints or your face," Australian Privacy Foundation chairman Roger Clarke said.
Labor MP Anthony Byrne, the intelligence and security committee's deputy chairman, expressed deep concern at a public hearing last week about the privacy implications.
"I am deeply, deeply uncomfortable with that level of data being kept by that department, particularly given the potential for someone to break into that and basically lift hundreds of thousands of fingerprints of Australian citizens," he said.
"Think about the privacy implications of that with iris recognition, which is used for laptops and computer systems. Iris scans are now being used on portable devices."
Emily Howie of the Human Rights Law Centre said more debate was needed about the government's counterterrorism laws.
"Australians' right to privacy is often eroded through the use of new surveillance powers and technologies without proper legal safeguards," she said. "Of course the government has a responsibility to protect the community, but it must do so in a manner that is reasonable and accountable."
