@Mike007, worldwide jurisdiction?
"good luck trying to get a (for example) UK company to comply with Australian law"
They might have a bit more luck with this than you think. The loophole they speak of is an Australian company passing data they have collected onto a foreign company, who is then as not nearly as constrained as the Australian company would be. It's a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.
I think it's there because of Australian companies are saying behind closed doors it is simply impossible for them to control what a labourer in India might do. That is bullshit of course, but I imagine it would be a PITA because it would require them to negotiate new contractual arrangements that would probably be more expensive, and it would effect a lot of large business because outsourcing our data processing to foreigners is as common in Australia as it is anywhere in the OECD. That would be those same big businesses who have the money to spend on getting a word or two into the governments ear.
As for the article suggesting it was liberals wanting a cost justification - you've gotta be kidding me. That would be the same liberals who are saying they will pay the polluters to stop polluting, rather than penalise or taxing them for polluting. They are no better economic rationalists that the Republicans in the US - the ones who put the US in its current hole by fighting two wars at the same time, and paying for it by dropping interest rates to 0. It was the green senators who want to wanted to look at the economic arguments, but I doubt they care about the economics either.
Gawd, the older I get, the more I loath politicians.