February 9, 2023
ALI MOORE: Who should watch the Watchers? I'm talking here about security cameras and who makes them. It would seem that we have a large number of cameras at a number of significant sites in this country. And the cameras have been made by Chinese companies. James Paterson is a Liberal Senator for Victoria, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security and Countering Foreign Interference. Senator James Paterson, good morning.
JAMES PATERSON: Good morning and thank you for having me.
MOORE: You've done a six-month audit of security cameras. Why?
PATERSON: Well, in September last year, I asked the Department of Home Affairs whether or not they had any cameras manufactured by Hikvision or Dahua in their facilities and whether they had any visibility of them in any other Commonwealth departments or agencies. They said, yes, they did, but no, they didn't know whether or not they were in any other department or agency. And so, I submitted a Question on Notice through the Senate to every department and agency. And those results are now back. It shows that almost 1,000 units provided by these two companies exist in Commonwealth departments, including the
Department of Defence, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Attorney-General's Department, frankly, places where they never should have been.
MOORE: Tell us about the two companies, the two companies that are making these cameras.
PATERSON: So, these two companies are closely linked to the Chinese Communist Party. They are directly involved in the surveillance and repression of Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang, things which the United Nations has said might constitute crimes against humanity and others have said might constitute genocide. They have been banned from government agencies in our two closest security partners, the United Kingdom and the United States, and the Biometrics and Surveillance Commissioner of the United Kingdom, a statutory appointee, has said they constitute "digital asbestos" and that we all need a plan to get rid of them. So that's why I launched this audit. I'm disturbed by the findings and I'm calling on the government to get rid of them as soon as possible.
MOORE: There's another aspect to this, isn't there, in relation to the companies themselves, because there are rules around which all companies that are headquartered in China they have to abide by. Can you give us a sense of what or how you see those rules and how you think they add to the risk?
PATERSON: You're right. In 2017, the Chinese government enacted a National Intelligence law. What that law requires is all Chinese companies and all Chinese citizens must secretly cooperate with Chinese intelligence agencies. So, these companies or their employees could be required to pass over the sensitive data, images or audio collected by these devices in Australia to Chinese intelligence agencies. And given the broader context of our bilateral relationship with China, where the Chinese Communist Party is trying to economically coerce us, where they are responsible for record levels of foreign interference and espionage in our country. We can't just treat these like any other company. They present a really unique and significant national security risk.
MOORE: So, what sort of information do you think is really at risk? Because, I mean, what could they transmit? What could they, I'm just trying to work out, they're a security camera, they're not usually particularly sophisticated things?
PATERSON: Well, security cameras in our most sensitive buildings observe people who are coming and going. Some of them are audio equipped and can observe what people are saying. That's all of great interest to hostile foreign nation states and in this case authoritarian states...
MOORE: And how would the manufacturers access that?
PATERSON: Well, there's been vulnerabilities identified previously in these products that allow third parties to take complete control of them, to control the feed, to control the audio and to control the video. So that is a very real risk. I asked the director general of ASIO, Mike Burgess, about this in Senate Estimates last year, and he said it is of great concern to him of where that data is being stored and how it can be used.
MOORE: So you want them removed. I do note that the Australian War Memorial has already made a decision to remove almost a dozen cameras from their site. They seem to be leading the way?
PATERSON: I really welcome that by the Australian War Memorial. That's the appropriate and responsible attitude. Interestingly, the National Disability Insurance Agency has also fessed up that they have these cameras, that they have a plan to remove them and replace them. And I'd like to see every single federal government agency, certainly those that are related to national security and defence adopt that same attitude and get moving on this as soon as possible.
MOORE: Is there any suggestion, though, that there has been a problem?
PATERSON: What we do know is that these cameras have vulnerabilities and that they have been able to be taken control of in the past by hackers or others. And the truth is, you can never know for absolutely sure what's happening with the data and where it's going. It's the same reason why we banned Huawei from being involved in the rollout of not just our 5G network, but prior to that, our 4G network and our NBN. These companies have an intimate relationship with an authoritarian government who has a very hostile posture to Australia. I don't think it's a risk that we should be taking.
MOORE: And yet it seems ironic that we allow TikTok?
PATERSON: Well, I'm also very concerned about that. And as it happens, I'm leading a Senate Select Committee on Foreign Interference Through Social Media this year. TikTok is a major problem. Millions of Australians have it on their devices. TikTok has admitted to me in correspondence that that data which is collected is accessible in mainland China by their engineers and they are subject to those same intelligence laws. So, the data collected on the phones of millions of Australians could also be passed on to the Chinese Communist Party, and that's a risk we have to step up to and address as well.
MOORE: Do any government agencies in this country ban TikTok?
PATERSON: Yes, I have also launched an audit as it happens of every Commonwealth department and agency and their response to TikTok. And so far, we've learned that the
Department of Defence, that the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, for example, banned their employees from downloading TikTok on their work-issued devices. And I'm in the process of asking all the other government departments whether they have the same policies in place. Now, if it's not safe to be on the phones of our bureaucrats, I think we have to think very seriously about whether it's safe enough to be on the phones of our children, and if it isn't what we need to do in response to that.
MOORE: Is there a risk here, and let's focus on the security cameras, which is very much a live issue at the moment. Is there a risk of antagonising China just as we seem to be thawing the relationship?
PATERSON: Well, I think we always have to stand up for our national security and our sovereignty, and we also have to stand up for our values. I mean, I'm not comfortable with Australian taxpayers' money going to companies who are involved in some of the most horrific and profound human rights abuses that we've seen in this century. I mean, we should be deeply morally uncomfortable with aiding a company that's involved in using surveillance technology and facial recognition technology to surveil the Uyghur people just because they're an ethnic minority, because they're Muslims in China. I'm not comfortable with that.
MOORE: So are there Australian-made companies that will put in or replace these security cameras?
PATERSON: Yeah, I don't want to provide consumer advice to your listeners...
MOORE: No, and I don't want you to give the name of the company. But we do produce security cameras is the question?
PATERSON: Not in Australia, but there are other countries that are much less problematic in their bilateral relations that do produce security cameras that are not made in China or linked to the Chinese government, and they are a preferable alternative.
MOORE: Maybe we should make them here.
PATERSON: Indeed.
MOORE: Senator James Paterson, thank you for your time.
PATERSON: Thank you, Ali.
ENDS
