Continuing his evidence, Hudson said Commonwealth and state law enforcement, security, and intelligence agencies each had “different interpretations” on how information is shared between agencies.
NSW Police had a “very open” interpretation of the Protective Security Policy Framework, which governs what information can be shared, but said other agencies weren’t as transparent.
“If there is risk or threat, we will share information with other agencies, but other agencies can, on occasions, not be so forthcoming, and that has created a difficulty in dealing with other agencies in terms of the relationship with information sharing,” he said.
“Getting information to the areas where it needs to be, in my opinion, should be the priority to be appropriately addressed, rather than relying upon the [framework], and as a justification for not sharing information.”
Read the full article here
