May 31, 2023
SHARRI MARKSON: We've also been talking here in Australia about the use of Chinese CCTV cameras in our own sensitive defence areas for our own cybersecurity. Initially we were told that there were 41 across defence sites. But today Defence admitted they misled us all with the numbers. Senator James Paterson, the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs and Cyber Security, joins me now. Look, great to see you tonight, James. These are quite explosive revelations from Senate Estimates this morning. What did they admit and why did they say they had misled us on just how many cameras were installed?
JAMES PATERSON: Sharri, thanks for your ongoing interest in this important story. As you might remember, I first approached the Department of Defence and every other department in the government late last year, in October last year, and asked them whether or not they had these devices and if so, how many. They finally came back to me in February this year and they said they only had one. But a week later they told you one of your former colleagues Ellen Whinnett at The Australian newspaper that actually it was 42. And this morning they admitted to me that actually it was 435. So, I know inflation is bad in the economy right now, but in terms of Chinese CCTV camera-inflation, it's out of control, 435 times as much as they first thought they had. Frankly, their explanation as to why there was a much greater number than they first thought was not very compelling. They basically said they have a lot of sites and they had to do a proper physical audit to check all their sites. Really, it's quite disturbing that they didn't know that they had been buying hundreds of these cameras and installing them across defence sites.
SHARRI: Yes, 100 per cent, well, let's have a look at them making that admission today.
CLIP EXCERPT
CELIA PERKINS: We found more devices than we had registered. We now have a complete register of a little over 10,000 individual devices in a smaller number of systems. And as we did that work, we found additional devices by manufacturers of concern. The total number of devices was 435. We removed as many of them as we could immediately. Sometimes they were in locations where we needed specialist equipment to get to them. And in some cases, we needed to leave them on for work, health and safety or other reasons. We are now working through a process of getting to complete removal of devices and we are on track to have that completed by the 30th of June.
PATERSON: So you told me in response to a question or notice that there was one. You told the media there was 42, but there was in fact 435.
PERKINS: Yes, Senator.
PATERSON: That's extraordinary.
EXCERPT ENDS
SHARRI: Again, it raises this issue, James Paterson, of oversight. Who is actually keeping track of something so important as how many Chinese cameras are in our most sensitive government areas?
PATERSON: That's exactly right, Sharri. And right now, I'm still waiting for a question on notice to be returned by the Department of Defence, which is already a month overdue, on how many drones they use manufactured by the company DJI. A number of other government departments have fessed up to having them, have promised to get rid of them. But I still don't have an answer from Defence. And what we really need here is a much more proactive approach from the Albanese Labor Government. It is not good enough to wait for me to think of the next Chinese technology company of concern, submit questions on notice, compile them, release them to the media, and then they promise to get rid of them. They need to be on the front foot. They need to be looking for these technology vulnerabilities themselves and proactively assessing them and removing them if the risk can't be mitigated.
SHARRI: Yeah. Now, look, I want to ask you, there was quite a worrying incident that took place over the South China Sea. The US military have released a statement saying that a
Chinese fighter jet conducted an unnecessarily aggressive manoeuvre during an intercept of a US spy plane. Is this an indication that tensions are escalating?
PATERSON: It is, Sharri. It's another instance of repeated unprofessional behaviour by the People's Liberation Army over the South China Sea. We've seen it both over the water and in the air, and we've said it in relation to US assets, to Canadian assets and Australian assets where they've engaged in dangerous manoeuvres that could cause an accident. And who knows where it would go from there? The last thing that any one of us need is an accident that spirals into a crisis. And so, the irresponsible activity that the PLA has repeatedly engaged in is incredibly irresponsible and raises the temperature in the region at a time in which we should all be seeking to lower it.
SHARRI: Exactly. Now, what do you make of General Jack Keane's warning that there could be massive cyber attacks from China? Is this something that Australia is anticipating as well as the US?
PATERSON: He's right to be concerned about this. Last week, the Australian cyber security agency, the Australian Signals Directorate joined with all of its Five Eyes partners to publicly attribute an attack on a US critical infrastructure facility in Guam. Now, the reason why that's important, and I questioned the Signals Directorate about this in Estimates last night, is that it is very reasonable to assume that if they had that presence on a US critical infrastructure network that they're also seeking or may indeed already have that presence on an Australian critical infrastructure network. Now, there is no innocent reason, there's no innocent purpose to be lying dormant on a critical infrastructure network of a potential adversary. The only reason you would do so is to engage in first espionage and second, to be able to engage in sabotage if you choose to do so in the future. So, the warning from the retired general is absolutely on the money.
SHARRI: So, does Australia need to take action then to make sure that China or other hostile actors aren't lying dormant on our critical infrastructure?
PATERSON: We absolutely do. And the good news is that we are. It was a big part of the rationale for the REDSPICE funding in the former government's last Budget in March 2022, a $10 billion investment in increasing the both the offensive and defensive capabilities of the Signals Directorate and also the critical infrastructure legislation which we passed, which requires entities that are vulnerable to these sort of attacks to step up their investment in their own defences. But we can't afford to be complacent. This is a constant challenge.
SHARRI: Yeah, definitely. Now this story has really captured my attention today. It's quite an amazing and significant interview. This is by the BBC News in the UK. They've interviewed the former head of China's Centre for Disease Control. His name is George Gao. He was in that role when the COVID pandemic started and he's told BBC News that a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology should not be ruled out as starting the pandemic. This, of course, contradicts the Chinese government's official position that it wasn't a lab leak. The BBC has also interviewed a second scientist, Professor Linfa Wang, and he told the BBC that when
he visited the Wuhan Institute of Virology in January 2020, just as the pandemic was starting, that his colleagues were losing sleep over the possibility that this had leaked from their laboratory. Have a listen:
CLIP EXERPT: She said, you know, I lost sleep for a day or two. The thing that was on her mind is that what happens if there's a sample in her lab, you know, that she did not know of, but it has a virus that, you know, contaminated something and it got out, right? That's exactly, you know, we're talking about this so-called ‘lab leak’, you know. So, then she went through all her samples to make sure there's nothing close to SARS-CoV-2. Even she basically says she has to eliminate a possibility of a laboratory contamination.
SHARRI: As we know, after that, the Chinese military went in and took control of the laboratory. But, James, this interview, particularly from George Gao, the former head of the Chinese CDC, is just so significant that if he was the head at the time, he was the one dealing with all the officials in the United States, the United States health secretary, as it was breaking out. And if he says it might have started from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, well, I mean, look, the source doesn't get any better than that?
PATERSON: It is a significant development. It is the first time that an official formerly associated with the Chinese government and probably still closely associated with the Chinese Communist Party has made this admission. Frankly, I would be concerned about his welfare after making an admission like this that is very contrary to the Party line on this question, where the CCP has tried to shut down any discussion about the possibility that this could have been a lab leak. We know that the US intelligence community has looked at this very closely and they are divided on it. Some of them believe it was natural origin, others believe it was more likely to be a lab leak. The truth is we don't know. And the only way we are ever going to get to the bottom of this is if the Chinese government allows the world to get to the bottom of this and opens up all the records and all the sites and has a truly independent, genuine investigation. They've thwarted every attempt by the World Health Organisation and others to get to the bottom of this, and we should all want to know how it was that this occurred, given the horrific damage that has done to the world over the last three years.
SHARRI: Yeah, absolutely. Senator James Paterson, Shadow Home Affairs Minister, thank you very much for your time.
ENDS
