April 4, 2023
Tuesday 4 April 2023
Interview with Peter Stefanovic, First Edition
Subjects: Donald Trump, reported TikTok ban on federal devices
PETER STEFANOVIC: Joining us live now from Washington D.C. is Liberal Senator and Shadow Minister of Cyber Security, James Paterson. James, good to see you in the US. What a time to be there. What do you make of the Trump sideshow while you're there?
JAMES PATERSON: Well, Peter, I was in New York City on the weekend for some meetings, and I can confirm the city is operating completely as normal. You wouldn't know what's going on. It's certainly attracting a lot of media attention, but not something I'll be commenting on as it’s a legal process in a foreign country.
STEFANOVIC: Well, what we've got you on is to talk about TikTok and the fact that we've spoken about this for weeks, if not months now. The government, it looks as though according to reports, the government will ban TikTok from government devices. What's your response to that?
PATERSON: Well, I hope first of all, that that's right, because we've had a couple of false starts and the media has been speculating for weeks that the government's been about to announce a ban and they haven't done so yet. I really hope it is right and I do welcome it. But it is very, very late.
As you said, we've been talking about this issue on this program for almost a year. It was ten months ago that TikTok admitted to me in a letter that Australian user data is accessible and has been accessed in mainland China, which of course puts it in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party under their intelligence laws. And our closest allies and friends have been acting for months. It's more than 90 days since the US banned it on their government devices. The UK, Canada, New Zealand, European Union, France, so many others have followed suit. And I have to say in my discussions, while I'm here, with members of Congress and officials in the administration and defence industry, many of them have been puzzled and wondering why Australia is so out of step and so far behind.
STEFANOVIC: Well, the Labor Party or the Government has put this on you in recent times and suggested, well, why didn't you do anything about it when you were in government?
PATERSON: Well, all of the major revelations about TikTok's national security risks have happened on their watch. All of our allies have banned it on their watch. It was in December last year, for example, that TikTok admitted that it had used the application to spy on journalists to try and identify their sources, something that in October last year they were accused of but denied and said wasn't technically possible. It's why I first wrote to Clare O'Neil about this in July. I initially didn't receive a response, so I wrote to the Prime Minister in October, and finally, now, all these months later, it looks like they're acting. But they are in government. They have to take responsibility and they need to move much more quickly.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. So, it looks as though it's going to be banned on government devices. But according to reports, James, a broader ban on the app in the private domain is not going to happen. So, what are your thoughts on that?
PATERSON: Well, it's good that it's going to be banned from government devices because it removes that espionage risk to public servants. But the data privacy and security risks and also the foreign interference risks that affect millions of Australians who use the platform are so far not yet dealt with. And they have to be dealt with. Dealing with it on government devices is only the start. I'm very prepared to work with the government in a bipartisan way because this is a complex problem. And in the United States they are having a very active debate about whether banning the app is necessary to achieve that or whether other measures can achieve that. For example, forcing ByteDance to divest its ownership of TikTok to a non-Chinese owner. Australia needs to be part of that conversation, we need to be involved in that debate, but we're not even at first base yet.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, so politicians, they shouldn't, in your view, they shouldn't be allowed to use it on their private phones as well?
PATERSON: Well, I don't use it on my phone. It is the judgment of individual politicians as to what they do. Putting it on your private phone at least removes the risk that it could potentially access your other apps that are work related, but it doesn't remove the risk that it could, for example, identify your physical location and draw inferences out about that. So, there are real risks if politicians continue to use it, but it is to their individual judgment.
STEFANOVIC: But could ByteDance, I mean, would you be supportive of that?
PATERSON: Well, I think politicians should make their own judgments. It is a tool to communicate with their constituents. It's up to them. But I don't have it on my device, and I never have.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. But I mean, it looks as though the states are going to follow, in particular, your state of Victoria. It looks like Daniel Andrews is going to fall right behind Anthony Albanese already. Your thoughts on that catching on?
PATERSON: Well, I welcome that. That's a really good initiative, I hope every other state and territory follows. But it was actually only a few weeks ago that an official within the department of environment and climate change at the state level in Victoria issued a ban on the application on all work devices and the Premier's office overruled it and the Premier publicly attacked that official and said they had no authority to make that decision and reversed that decision. I think the Premier owes that public servant an apology. They were publicly attacked for doing their job. It turns out they were right. Daniel Andrews is finally implementing what they were just being much more proactive about. So, it's good that the states are following but I hope that they do so properly.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, and just a final one here. I mean, it's so popular, TikTok, particularly with the youngsters. I mean, should it still be able to be in place? TikTok as it is, you know, for the private community, for the kids?
PATERSON: My view is that all options need to be on the table because this is not only a data security risk for all those users and young people. It's also a foreign interference risk. The reality is many young people get their news, current affairs and information about the world through applications like TikTok, and it would be trivially easy for the Chinese Communist Party to direct ByteDance and TikTok to suppress narratives that are contrary to their interests, to promote narratives that support their interest, or just sow division and undermine social cohesion and national unity. We cannot allow, in this strategic environment, an authoritarian state to have unregulated access to millions of Australians devices...
STEFANOVIC: Ok, so how do you regulate it?
PATERSON: And every option has to be on the table.
STEFANOVIC: Such as?
PATERSON: Well, the first step is not ruling out banning it because if TikTok believes that you won't ban it, then they won't come to the table to talk about those other possible solutions. One of the solutions is a potential divestment of TikTok from ByteDance because it is the ultimate corporate control of TikTok by ByteDance, which is the core of the problem because ByteDance is intimately tied to the Chinese Communist Party and all its employees are subject to the intelligence laws of China.
STEFANOVIC: Yeah, and that's what the US is looking at too at the moment. James, we're out of time. Appreciate your time though. Thanks for coming to us there from Washington, D.C. James Paterson.
