Controversial Cybercrime Bill Introduced In Australia

An anonymous reader writes "The Australian government instructed a committee to investigate required changes to cybercrime legislation. Having received the report, the government decide to ignore it and give the federal police almost everything it wants on a plate. From the article: 'The Australian Greens have questioned the decision of the Government and Opposition to pass the Cybercrime Bill unchanged through the House of Representatives despite recommendations by their own members of parliament to fix serious flaws. Greens communications spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam said the Cyber Safety Committee had tabled a highly critical unanimous report on the bill, proposing a series of amendments and requests for clarification which were not addressed in the House.'"

Comments

You know you're screwed when...

[Sparx139]

The only sensible voice in your government is the Greens

Re:You know you're screwed when...

[ShakaUVM]

>>Because they "dare" question financial axioms like "greed is good" and infinite growth?

More because they've caused as many environmental problems as they've solved. Australia has around a quarter of all the uranium deposits in the world, but has no nuclear power plants. Opposition is greatest from Greens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Australia#Opinion_polls), and this in a country where only 7% of energy production comes from green sources.

Fighting for the status quo is a horrible idea when the status quo sucks.

Re:You know you're screwed when...

[FriendlyLurker]

Australia also recently greatly expanded its Surveillance State. In combination with this new "cyberCrime" bill the game is set - This is the states power grab to control information on the internet.

Quote from that last link "A prime aim of the growing Surveillance State":

The emergence of entities like WikiLeaks (which single-handedly jeopardizes pervasive government and corporate secrecy) and Anonymous (which has repeatedly targeted entities that seek to impede the free flow of communication and information) underscores the way in which this conflict is a genuine "war." The U.S. Government's efforts to destroy WikiLeaks and harass its supporters have been well-documented. Meanwhile, the U.S. seeks to expand its own power to launch devastating cyber attacks: there is ample evidence suggesting its involvement in the Stuxnet attacks on Iran, as well as reason to believe that some government agency was responsible for the sophisticated cyber-attack that knocked WikiLeaks off U.S. servers (attacks the U.S. Government tellingly never condemned, let alone investigated). Yet simultaneously, the DOJ and other Western law enforcement agencies have pursued Anonymous with extreme vigor. That is the definition of a war over Internet control: the government wants the unilateral power to cyber-attack and shut down those who pose a threat ot it, while destroying those who resists those efforts.

Just shows how things really are

[acehole]

It's a minority government with Labor depending on a couple of independents and a green to have the numbers in the lower house. When things like this come up, Labor and the Coalition (Liberals + Nationals) hold hands like old chums to make sure what they want gets through. Australia has pretty much the same problem as the US in the political system. Team Blue and Team Red. Anyone else that is voted for is just a token effort.

Labor and the Coalition might have different ideals but they're both members of the same "old boys" club and be damned if anyone is going to threaten that.