The Albanese government and its officials continue to resist attempts to clarify what personal data will be given to the US government under an Enhanced Border Security Partnership that is being secretly negotiated with the Trump administration.
Greens leader David Shoebridge devoted an extended period of the appearance of the Home Affairs department before the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee yesterday to obtaining basic information about the state of negotiations on the partnerships. The US is demanding that all countries that currently participate in the Visa Waiver Program finalise partnerships for sharing personal and biometric data on their citizens by the end of December.
The European Union has conducted a public consultation process about the development of partnerships between the US and member countries, and the New Zealand government has spoken about its negotiations with the US, but the Department of Home Affairs persistently refused to even acknowledge that discussions were underway, until Shoebridge used estimates to force officials to admit that they were talking to the Americans.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 1266792
Yesterday, Shoebridge resumed his effort to determine what personal information the US was demanding, while Home Affairs officials — chiefly the department’s Head of National Security, Hamish Hansford — continued to attempt to stonewall the Greens senator. Hansford admitted that meetings had been held with US officials in August, and that an officer had been sent to the US to conduct further talks earlier this month, but as to the detail of what the US was demanding, officials clung stubbornly to the line that the US simply wanted to validate the name and passport number provided under the Visa Waiver Program application, and to check that applicants claiming no criminal record were doing so correctly. How those goals would be achieved was still a subject of discussion, officials insisted, including either by Australia providing the validation, or providing information to the US for it to do the validation.
Shoebridge refused to let the issue go, however, and repeatedly demanded to know what kind of information the US wanted, eventually securing an admission that US officials had asked for biometric information. Who would have access to Australians’ biometric information if it was handed to the US, Shoebridge continued — would it be given to Palantir, which is a major Department of Homeland Security contractor?
Officials declined to rule out Australians’ data being handed to Palantir, saying only that their goal was for the information to be stored “securely”. They had not, they told Shoebridge, told the US that passing the information to Palantir was unacceptable.
What about passing the information to third countries, an issue that was an obvious source of tension between the US and the EU? It was too early to discuss that issue, Home Affairs replied, because it was still not yet agreed how the “validation” sought by the US was to be achieved.
Given there’s only around two months to go before the US deadline, it seems unlikely a partnership will be agreed by then. Nor are there any current plans to conduct a public consultation about whatever is agreed. Officials said they expected the US would recognise that Australia had responded to the US demand with a “mature, collaborative approach” when considering whether Australia would remain part of the Visa Waiver Program beyond that point.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 1242829
From the moment Crikey revealed the secret plans for an information-sharing partnership with the US back in February, Home Affairs has adopted a two-pronged strategy: refuse to respond to any media inquiries about the negotiations, and when unable to avoid answering questions asked by Shoebridge in Senate committee hearings, insisting that things were at too early a stage to provide any concrete details: “[I]t is unclear some elements about what the US is requiring,” officials told Shoebridge at the budget estimates hearings. “So that’s why we’re having the meetings to understand their specific requirements.”
But if anything, the “details” that were revealed yesterday, in light of the two subsequent meetings with the US, are even sparser than those provided at previous hearings. Crikey’s own Freedom of Information request to Home Affairs, made back in February, continues to be stonewalled, with its one-year anniversary now approaching, and no response from the department except a series of excuses about the need for “consultation”.
As demonstrated yesterday, that refusal to provide any details leaves the government wide open to criticism of potential scenarios such as Palantir, a company widely described as “evil“, obtaining access to the biometric data not just of Australians seeking to enter the US, but that of their families and associates, or the US handing biometric data of Australians on to third countries. And given the state of negotiations, it’s not even clear whether Australia will still be part of the Visa Waiver Program from January 1 next year.
If visa-free access to the US suddenly ends on New Year’s Day, Shoebridge and Crikey will likely stop being the only ones actually bothering to pursue the government about these partnerships.
