MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND SPORT, ANIKA WELLS: Morning, everyone. As our wonderful Member for Bean mentioned, we have just had a great session with the students here at St Mary MacKillop regarding a really significant change in the lives of young Australians with one month to go today. A change that as of today is just one month away from 10 December, our social media minimum age law will give Australians under 16 three more years to build community and to build resilience in real life. Our national education campaign has already seen record numbers of people visiting the eSafety website to learn more about the reform. Since the campaign launch three weeks ago, more than 200,000 Australians have gone to the esafety.gov.au website. That is about 20 times the usual weekly traffic since the campaign started.

As Dave Smith and I just spoke about to students here, young people can expect to have their accounts deactivated, but they can make now that they are staying connected to the people and the things that they love by backing up content and by backing up photos and by exploring other ways to keep in touch. I encourage anyone with questions or in need of support to check out the practical information that is available to you at the esafety.gov.au website. Our world-leading social media laws are not a cure, but they are a treatment plan. They will give children their childhood back and they’ll give parents peace of mind. So happy to take your questions.

JOURNALIST: Minister Wells, you got the opportunity to talk to a few students here this morning. How are they receiving the ban, what was their feedback to you?

WELLS: I wouldn’t want to verbal them because they’re standing just behind you, listening keenly to everything that I say. We had a mixture of students who are both over 16 and under 16, so a mixture of people who will be impacted by the ban and people who are beyond the ban. I would say I think there was a positive and optimistic approach – a couple of questions around exactly how it would work, why the age of 16 was picked in particular, and I guess the question that we hear over and over, which is what do I have to do, what does my mum or dad have to do? And the answer to that is nothing. The onus is on the platforms. Platforms have had 12 months to work through what this looks like. Under the regulatory guidance that we have provided, they must communicate with their users in a kind and empathetic way. They must say this is coming. They must step through what it’s going to look like and the appeals process. So, all in all, I think we finished on a hopeful note that we’re going to create important cultural change come or from 10 December.

JOURNALIST: You say the list of platforms that are on the list is not set and forget, and that the platforms are assessed on whether their main function is social interaction.

WELLS: That’s right.

JOURNALIST: A lot of parents have expressed concern about Roblox in particular, the gaming platform. Is there a world where that platform will be added after 10 December?

WELLS: Yeah, that’s absolutely something that could happen. The eSafety Commissioner has said that she has assessed Roblox to be a gaming platform rather than a social media platform on balance. It’s something that is close. But in the particular instance of Roblox, it is essentially a game that has features that mirror social media. And you might have heard her speak to this in our press conference last week, she said, but for the game, she assessed that users would not be there for the social media features. If that was to change, or if we were to detect that people were swarming there and there was more harm being created, then absolutely Roblox would be in the sights of the eSafety Commissioner.

JOURNALIST: Is there a problem with the legislation though, Minister, in that it’s targeting social interaction rather than actually the harm or the risk that a platform poses to children? Is that a problem with the legislation?

WELLS: I wouldn’t characterize the legislation like that whatsoever. The law is about a minimum age for social media, and when I talk about features and functions like I just did, that’s how the eSafety Commissioner determines whether a platform is categorised as a social media or age-restricted social media platform or not, according to the law. There are exemptions for gaming, there are exemptions for health and education apps, there is an exception for professional networking apps as well because it’s about- social media has its place. The internet has many useful functions for us. We all can gain a lot out of the internet and out of social media. But when the data that is in now and in possession of eSafety, kids who experienced things like nudify or porn or bullying in that vein online, when seven out of ten kids have experienced harm online, that is data that we can’t ignore. So, we’re having a big crack at it with these laws, and I don’t pretend for a second, they’re going to be perfect. I think I said inside they’re going to be messy, didn’t I? It’s going to look a bit untidy on the way through. Big reforms always do. But at the end of the day, the cultural change that this is going to affect where instead of everybody being on social media and one kid being isolated because they’re not, it will be the inverse, and that will be a really powerful change for Australian kids.

JOURNALIST: Last night there was news that Derek Elias [inaudible]… on what he says was corruption infecting the federal government’s offshore detention regime, alleging [indistinct] to cover those up- covering up suspected rorting. Will the government review all the contracts where there are allegations of bribery or wrongdoing?

WELLS: Well, speaking well outside my portfolio here, those contracts were contracts that were part and parcel of the previous government, the Morrison government, and all government contracts in this particular space are ultimately contractual matters for the government of Nauru.

JOURNALIST: Are you anticipating any swarm to other apps that are included on the ban? Just to use Roblox as an example. Anticipating that after [indistinct] term, or any preparations for, I don’t know, online predators to swarm to particular apps?

WELLS: Yeah. I remember when the Prime Minister and I made the announcement about the rules several months ago now, I sort of made the joke that if kids go to LinkedIn, then we’re going to have a look at LinkedIn. You know, it’s about the forms and features. Obviously, LinkedIn is currently exempt as a professional networking app under the rules, but the eSafety Commissioner and the eSafety Commission as part of their bread and butter business works with platforms every single day about harms online. So, whilst this is a huge cultural change for us - we’re the first in the world to do this - the actual mechanics of regulating platforms to try and improve online safety is absolute core business for eSafety Commission. It was the first in the world to be established 10 years ago and we’ll continue that work in this space.

JOURNALIST: Minister, can I just ask about the Senate’s Optus inquiry? Were you actually asked to appear before that? 

WELLS: I have certainly been asked through the media by senators to appear.

JOURNALIST: [Talks over] Have you actually received an invitation?

WELLS: No. Let us check that. But I think as of Friday, you know, when I left the office last week, no, I had not been formally asked to appear. I had just been asked through television to appear, but I would also say, like, the Senate is no place for House ministers, and as of probably your question now I’ve been asked more than 75 questions about what happened at Optus between the questions at question time in the House of Representatives and at the many press conferences I have done on this since it happened. So, I am available, happy to take another one from you if that would fill your cup. But I think that will do.

JOURNALIST: It would actually. [Laughs] You would have heard the testimony from [indistinct]…

WELLS: [Talks over] Sorry- who, sorry?

JOURNALIST: Stephen Rue, and Optus executives last week before the Senate inquiry. What was your- what did you [indistinct]?

WELLS: Look, I didn’t hear all of it because it was also a sitting day in the House of Reps and I’m a busy cabinet minister with a lot on as well. I wasn’t watching every minute of that inquiry. I guess what I observed was that a lot of the information that was discussed or asked by senators and responded to by Optus is information that was already in the public light. The chair of ACMA and I did, I think, two press conferences across that weekend. The chair of ACMA did- we spoke to many of the elements of the timeline that then some of these coalition senators came out and acted shocked by the revelations that were in the public arena six weeks ago at that point.

I think though the more comprehensive timeline is helpful for people to understand what’s happening but there are also two other reviews underway. Kerry Schott is leading the review for Optus into how Optus needs to completely revise how it operates in the wake of this. And I think that’s what’s most important because at the end of the day, these are Optus customers, these are Australians who use Optus, who need the second biggest telco in Australia to be fit for purpose and to do what every Australian expects of them. And this is two outages now where Optus has comprehensively failed to do that as a private company seeking to operate in Australia and have Australian customers.

So, what I’m most keen on is to see the Kerry Schott review and also you might have seen that I asked and Optus agreed to have Kearney, a third party, have a look over their systems as well. And some of that came to light when you saw more outages happen when lines were vandalised at the end of last week.

JOURNALIST: With the testimony and the submission that Optus gave [indistinct], does that give you more confidence that Optus is moving in the right direction? That they have [inaudible]…

WELLS: No, like you said, I’ve said it all along- sorry, not no in the answer to your question, but no, in my view, the two inquiries, both the Kerry Schott inquiry and the ACMA inquiry, which is the independent regulator, long accepted, and the chair of ACMA was both appointed and reappointed by the coalition, who are now saying that they have no faith. It’s so hypocritical. Those two inquiries are really important to what I just said. Restoring faith in the second biggest telco, giving Optus customers peace of mind that it will do what they need to do when the time comes and making sure that Optus complies with the law because what has now happened comprehensively on two cases is that Optus has failed to comply with its obligations under Australian law.

DAVID SMITH: Thanks everyone. Appreciate your time.