April 5, 2023
Tuesday 4 April 2023
Interview with Greg Jennett, ABC Afternoon Briefing
Subjects: TikTok finally banned on federal devices
GREG JENNETT: Well, as soon as his party entered Opposition, virtually, Liberal Senator James Paterson's been demanding action by the government on TikTok. He's in Washington DC at the moment and we caught up with James Paterson just after the government's decision on the TikTok ban was made official.
James Paterson, you've been extremely critical about the time taken for the government to reach the decision that it has now made on the TikTok ban on publicly owned devices. Then again it took advice from ASD and other agencies. Hasn't due process simply been followed here by the Australian government?
JAMES PATERSON: There's no doubt, Greg, that it is a good thing that the Albanese government has finally made this decision, but it is not clear to me what has taken them so long to get here when our friends and allies have been acting for months and many weeks, and in the case of the United States over three months ago announcing their ban. It has been publicly reported that the Department of Home Affairs advice provided to the government was handed to them several weeks ago. So really, it's only them who can explain what the delay was and why we have lagged the world and are now the last of the Five Eyes partners to announce a ban.
JENNETT: You are there in the United States, engaged in multiple conversations with partners, broadly defined. What have they been saying about Australia's processes up to this point? I'm well aware they may not yet know of the government's decision.
PATERSON: Yes, I certainly have been quizzed in a number of my meetings with interlocutors here who were puzzled by the fact that Australia was taking so long to make this decision because Australia and the United States normally work in lockstep in these things. We normally make these decisions in very similar timing. Because the easiest thing to do is to ban it from government devices, but it's much harder to deal with the much more complex problems of the 150 million Americans or 6 to 7 million Australians who also use that app. And Americans have been wrestling with that wider, broader problem for a couple of months now. We haven't really got past first base until today, but we have to confront this too, because while it's good that we've protected public servants from the espionage risk, every Australian's privacy and security is at risk. Now, we're all exposed to the foreign interference risk posed by this app.
JENNETT: And are you satisfied that that broader consideration will be swept up in the separate body of work, which Clare O'Neil, as Home Affairs Minister, this is called the Social Media Policy Review that it is being conducted?
PATERSON: That's certainly my hope and the Opposition stands ready to work in a bipartisan way with the government to solve this problem because it is a complex and difficult problem, and it might involve some difficult choices. In the United States that they are keeping them on the table the possibility of a ban of TikTok and are also considering forcing ByteDance, its parent company, to divest TikTok to a non-Chinese owner to break that link between the company and the Chinese Communist Party. Australia has to be part of that conversation. We can't afford to be left behind or left out of it.
JENNETT: The Commonwealth being the pre-eminent authority here with agencies behind it having made this decision. Are there any grounds for a state or territory jurisdiction, James Paterson, not to now follow suit with devices that it has in its control?
PATERSON: No. Every state and territory government should immediately follow the advice provided by our agencies, which has been put into effect by the government today, and they should all get it off their devices too. And more broadly, people operating critical infrastructure, for example, should be considering about whether or not their employees should have it, because if it's an espionage risk for public sector employees, well, it's an espionage risk for everyone else as well.
JENNETT: Now, on the communication of this decision today, there's been an email pushed out by the Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, but no sign at the time at which we speak, James Paterson, that any minister is going to stand up and explain this decision publicly. What do you interpret in that communication policy?
PATERSON: It's puzzling and frankly inadequate that no government minister has yet fronted up at a press conference to explain this decision and answer questions about why it was made, when it was made, how it was made, and what the implications are. The Australian public is entitled to know why the government is taking what is quite a drastic step to ban this app. Now I'm obviously strongly supportive of it, but I'd like the government to front up and do so. I don't think it's adequate just to put out a media release and then think that's the end of it.
JENNETT: I'm sure people will make the suggestion, and I'm not sort of trying to put words in their mouths, but people may make the suggestion that this is a softly, softly approach, not wanting to upset diplomatic and trade ties with China, you know, tentative as they are in the rebuild phase. Do you apply that level of analysis?
PATERSON: Only the government can say for sure what their rationale is about the time taken to make this decision and the way in which they've announced it. But certainly, it was the case in 2018 when Australia led the world in banning Huawei from our 5G network that the Chinese government was very unhappy about it. Even a few weeks ago when I forced the government to get rid of the Hikvision and Dahua surveillance cameras in the federal government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in China condemned the government for doing so. So that might be part of their rationale, but they shouldn't be influenced by that. We must always put the national interest and the national security of Australians first. And if other governments don't like that, they're going to have to deal with it.
JENNETT: All right. And can I ask you about technical coverage here? The instructions as they're issued, in fact, it's called a direction from the Protective Security Policy framework that's overseen by the Attorney-General's Department. Fairly comprehensive, but there are, quote, "legitimate business reasons" why a government agency or department may be able to continue running TikTok as an app. Is that acceptable to have this wriggle room, do you think?
PATERSON: I can see theoretical cases where exceptions should apply, but it's very important that that is rigorously policed and doesn't become just a blanket exemption for anyone who wants to have the app. And it's also very important that every single one of those mitigations outlined in the directive is followed. Those mitigations are telling in and of themselves. They are very extensive. They even say that you need to keep the phone away in a secure area, away from conversations that could be recorded. And I think that really speaks to the level and depth of concern about the national security risks that this app poses, which of course, the company has denied for a long time. But they have a track record of denying things that subsequently turn out to be true about their operations.
JENNETT: And there are also some limits on the direction as it might apply to government business enterprises, corporations. I think the ABC, speaking frankly, is one that's not technically covered by it. NBN Co would be another. Do you have any views on whether any of those entities should be?
PATERSON: Well, journalists are in some ways at the greatest risk from this application because we have a smoking gun. In December last year, the company was forced to admit that it had used the app to try and spy on journalists as a means of identifying their sources. So, any journalist who is using the app, particularly on a device they also use to communicate with their sources, is putting those sources at risk and really shouldn't be taking those sort of risks. At the very least, it should be on a completely separate device, if at all.
JENNETT: Yeah, well, who knows? Perhaps some of these entities might make their own independent decisions in relation to TikTok. James Paterson getting late there where you are in Washington, DC. Appreciate your time this evening.
PATERSON: Thanks, Greg.
