Interview with Patricia Karvelas, ABC Radio National Breakfast

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: How safe is TikTok? The United States House has just voted to ban the app if it's not sold by Chinese company ByteDance, citing security concerns. Now there's growing pressure on the Australian Government to consider doing something similar. Communications Minister Michelle Rowland joins me now to talk about that and a range of other issues. Welcome to the program, Minister.
 
MICHELLE ROWLAND, MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS: Good morning.
 
KARVELAS: The US is clearly concerned - should Australia look at banning TikTok?
 
ROWLAND: We note developments in the US and other countries. I think it's important to note that this obviously is one that's proceeding through the normal course of the US legislative system. It does appear to have broad cross party support. But of course, it hasn't actually been enshrined in law yet.
 
But I make that point to note that Australia observes what is going on in the US and other countries in relation not only to TikTok, but to other potential security risks, and we take that very seriously. But we also make our own decisions based on advice from our own security agencies. As the Prime Minister has noted, we are an independent country and whilst we do take that advice, we have implemented that – obviously – in terms of having those restrictions on Government devices in Australia, which has also been the case I note in a number of other countries. But as the Prime Minister said, we make our own security assessments. We're an independent country, but of course, we note what is happening in other countries as well.
 
KARVELAS: As we should make our own decisions. So, has the Government received any intelligence briefings on TikTok?
 
ROWLAND: Well firstly, I'll say that this is an area where it is the Home Affairs portfolio, which primarily has carriage of responsibility here. But obviously, as an interested Minister, I can note a few things. Firstly, as I said, we are continuing to monitor that. We have taken steps in relation to Government devices and the ability to access this app. I think the other point that needs to be made is that any entity operating in Australia must comply with Australian law, and within the Attorney-General's portfolio, I note that there is already an investigation being undertaken by our privacy commissioner into how TikTok is handling personal information and whether that is compliant with the law. I also note that this is an important consideration that's being made by the Attorney-General in his consultation of the review of the Privacy Act right now as well. We'll continue to monitor those developments, but Australians should be in no doubt that our laws, as they exist in relation to the activities of this entity or any others, need to comply with our law and we will enforce regulations as necessary.
 
KARVELAS: And you're suggesting that these two reviews, Privacy Commissioner’s looking at it, and a review of our privacy laws could lead to reform when it comes to TikTok, if you're not looking at an outright ban?
 
ROWLAND: This is part of the ordinary course of Australian law and Australian law reform. Our Office of the Australian Information Commissioner will undertake its own inquiries, which could lead to a formal investigation as well, as there are particular issues that are alleged there. Again, as I said, we note what's happening in other countries, because the UK's own body, their Information Commissioner, has also been looking at these issues.
 
But it would be certainly the case that the Attorney-General, and I think the broader community and privacy advocates in this space in particular, are very alive to some of the issues that have been raised by TikTok's practices and the fact that our privacy laws need to be made fit for purpose. That's one of the key reasons why the Attorney-General has picked up this issue and is prosecuting it.
 
KARVELAS: Just a final question on this, there's so much community concern, I think, about it. TikTok has told Australia's parliament that there is data that can be accessed by TikTok staff in China. Does that worry you?
 
ROWLAND: Again, we know that our information [and] our security agencies are looking into this closely, and I think it is right for Australians to be concerned about how their personal information is being used and potentially exploited by any other entity. But again, Patricia, I make this point: we take these matters and decisions in a very sober way, based on the assessments and the best advice that we have. Our intelligence agencies are the best in the world and we'll always be guided by their assessments and their recommendations.
 
KARVELAS: Would you recommend teenagers, young people, getting on TikTok, or would you urge caution?
 
ROWLAND: Young people will make their own decisions, and I note that there's terms of service about usage. But again, these are ones, in a practical sense, are often difficult to enforce. These are apps that are widely made available to people. We know that there are people who use these who were of a young age as well. Again, I would point out that there is a role not only for the industry, but also a role for Government through our agencies, and one of the key ones here is our eSafety Commissioner which has a very wide range of accessible resources at esafety.gov.au. I encourage all your listeners who are seeking information in this area and how they may best communicate this with their children and people in their care to check that out.
 
KARVELAS: I want to move on to another issue. You're also working on the News Media Bargaining Code, which Meta has pulled out of. You said you were very disappointed when they announced their decision. Can you give us an update of where this is at? Josh Frydenberg, for instance, the previous Treasurer obviously says you should deal directly with the bosses, including Mark Zuckerberg. Are you doing that?
 
ROWLAND: Well, certainly in the last fortnight, what we have done is follow the processes that are set out under the News Media Bargaining Code. I note the former Treasurer's comments, and as he will be well aware, that engagement was made at a time when we did not have a law in place, when Facebook effectively unfriended Australia. We were in an environment where there were negotiations being undertaken with no regulatory backstop. So, this was essentially consultation by Government with key stakeholders and bringing a law into effect.
 
KARVELAS: So, you're saying that's different now, that scenario, in terms of being able to have direct contact?
 
ROWLAND: We are in a different strategic environment right now. It is one in which there is a well understood process of negotiate-arbitrate that is well known across the Communications portfolio, including in telecommunications. But what we are doing now is following what is set out in the law to the letter. And for the information of your listeners, just to recap: Meta currently has 13 deals in place with news publishers. There is an expectation under the Code framework, and certainly the Government has made its expectation very clear, that Meta would continue to engage in good faith with Australian news media publishers. It's now shown its hand. What we are doing now, because the rules under the Code say that if negotiation in good faith should not occur, the law provides the Government with the power to designate a platform. So, this activates provisions under the Code for commercial arbitration over the value of news content.
 
KARVELAS: And will you designate them?
 
ROWLAND: We need to go through a process, and there's two limbs to that, in deciding whether to designate a platform. The first limb has to show that there's a significant bargaining power imbalance between the platform and an Australian news business, and the second limb is whether the platform has made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry.
 
What we have done, very quickly, in the fortnight since this announcement was made, we have engaged with Meta, with Google and with Australian news media publishers. The ACCC is the regulatory agency in this respect, and I’m pleased to say the publishers have agreed to cooperate with the ACCC's need to gather data in order to examine those two limbs. Our approach is to follow the process. We have sought and continue to seek advice from Treasury and the ACCC on these limbs. The ACCC has invited publishers and platforms to voluntarily provide information to undertake this analysis, and we're also, as a Government, seeking feedback for publishers on their views about designation.
 
KARVELAS: Yes, and on that, we know a lot of the big media companies have said designate. So, they want you to - that's the majority that I can work out at this stage. Is that the direction you're heading in?
 
ROWLAND: We are going in the direction of following the Code. So, is actually required under the Code to make an assessment under these two limbs. I'm not going to pre-empt what that assessment is, but we are following that to the letter. I should also stress that Meta and these digital platforms are highly litigious and they have deep pockets. Their form has been demonstrated around the world, challenging decisions of governments and regulators. That is why we are proceeding in a very sober manner here, ensuring that we follow this to the letter, and we'll continue to do that. We’ll continue to engage with the publishers and with the platforms on this.
 
KARVELAS: Okay. Canada obviously has gone down this road. I know you've been speaking to your counterparts - what advice have they given you?
 
ROWLAND: Well, we note that if the Canadian experience is a reliable guide, this may or may not lead to renewal of deals, and that's a longer-term consideration. But again, we are obviously viewing what is going on in these other jurisdictions, and you will be aware that the announcement that was made a fortnight ago was not only in relation to Australia, it was in relation to the US as well. We will continue to have engagement with news media publishers around the world, as well as our counterparts there as well. But I will make this point: the whole impetus of the News Media Bargaining Code was the market power of the digital platforms in the information ecosystem. Meta is firmly embedded in that ecosystem now. It's able to exploit the use of content that it didn't create, that cost a lot of money to create, for monetary gain by sheer virtue of its market power. That was the whole point of this Code being enacted in the first place. What I think it's important here is to note that the ramifications here, the Government is very alive to,  this goes beyond simply a revenue issue for news media publishers. It goes to the value of the Fourth Estate and its role in our democracy. And it also means that as this is a competition element, we need to prove that limb about whether Meta has this superior bargaining position and how that is being utilised.
 
KARVELAS: Meta says they just don't want news on it, they don't think people are interested in news. Do you believe them?
 
ROWLAND: That is their contention, and that is what this process of information gathering will need to prove with evidence. You will have noted a term that some of your listeners may be familiar with, others may not. Their statement that they are going to “deprecate” Facebook news, so essentially make it redundant. Their argument here is that Facebook news in Australia, and they also say in the US, has dropped by over 80%. They've got less than -
 
KARVELAS: Do you think it's because they cooked an algorithm, which means they've deprioritised it already?
 
ROWLAND: This is the contention that publishers and some other bodies are making. But again, this is a matter for which we need evidence. We need the evidence that is set out as required under the Code, and we'll be following that.
 
KARVELAS: Okay. Minister, I just want to ask you, before I let you go, Tabcorp's Managing Director and CEO has resigned after the board became aware of inappropriate and offensive language in the workplace. He says he doesn't recall the alleged comment, but he's agreed to resign. What have your interactions been with him?
 
ROWLAND: It would be from some time ago. But I would note that that kind of behaviour is completely unacceptable and I think it is appropriate that this person resigns.
 
KARVELAS: Just finally, on another thing that you've been working on, before I get to my political panel. Last week you announced higher NBN speeds for Australian homes. How much will that cost?
 
ROWLAND: NBN is able to provide what we call these new turbo-charged speeds through its network by virtue of even more of its network being fibered up. We know that it's not a nice to have, it's an absolutely essential part of business and how we conduct ourselves in our daily lives. NBN is actually providing these speed boosts at no extra wholesale costs.
 
So, it would see, for example - you've got the three highest speed tiers and they would be boosted by up to five times at no extra cost. What that means for consumer is that we know that there's more and more connected devices. For example, at home, a couple of years ago it was about 10, it's now at around 22, and in a couple of years it'll be probably about 33 devices per household. It makes an incredible difference to the speed and quality of broadband that businesses and consumers are able to receive.
 
But we're going through – well, what NBN Co is going through – is a process of consultation with industry right now because of course, NBN, being the wholesaler, doesn't set retail prices. It's not intending to charge an increased wholesale fee, but of course retailers will need to take steps in order to implement this. It's reasonable that they consult on such a big change. But I think ultimately, this is great news for Australia. Our desire for speed as a nation is only going forwards, and it's going forwards at an exponential rate, particularly with the rise of AI and other connected devices.
 
KARVELAS: Thanks for joining us this morning, Minister.
 
ROWLAND: My pleasure.