Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

There are all sorts of types of motions that we debate in this place. There's one category of motion that I would class as bipartisan support of an issue. Then there's another class of motion, which might be detailed policy consideration of an issue. Then there's a third class of motion, which has been becoming more and more common in this place and in the main chamber. That's a motion of a category moved by the opposition. It's where the opposition puts a motion bemoaning, 'Why aren't you cleaning up the mess we left you faster?' That's a motion which acts as though there wasn't just a decade when nothing happened on a certain issue. Then, when the government has started taking action or has even in some cases completed that action, they bemoan the fact that it wasn't sooner or faster or better.

There is some common ground in this debate. There is quite a deal of common ground. I share a number of the concerns raised by the mover of the motion and by speakers on both sides of this chamber. There are some aspects of TikTok which I think are potentially positive, but there are many aspects of that app which are very worrying. It is highly addictive, as previous speakers have alluded to. Much of its content is inappropriate. It contains a great deal of misinformation, particularly on a range of political matters. There are, at times, issues relating to censorship. And of course, as a number of speakers in this debate have alluded to, there are issues relating to privacy. But what isn't common ground is when those opposite move beyond those kinds of observations.

I think we in this chamber all today care about national security, but then those opposite move from those observations to saying the government doesn't take this seriously or the government is sitting on its hands because it hasn't responded to a serious, detailed report in one day. Well, I remind this chamber of a serious report, an interim report, that was handed down in the previous term. The Select Committee on Foreign Interference through Social Media was established in December 2019, and an important interim report was handed down in December 2021. I want to cite some of the findings of that report. A number of experts gave evidence to that report, and the evidence of a number of those experts was cited directly in that interim report:

Experts have been clear that what is required is a coordinated, cohesive response.

One of the experts said:

I think that what matters most is having a body that has the ability to look through multiple different sides of this problem …

That interim report noted there was no such body established by the coalition, notwithstanding the fact that this issue had been emerging since 2016—at the time of this report in December 2021, for many years. Secondly, it was found in this report:

Nor has the government developed a coordinated approach. The committee was concerned by the convoluted answer to a simple question—

to a number of different agencies—

who is in charge?

So in December 2021 it had been made clear that no-one was clearly in charge of this issue, which had been emerging for a number of years. Again, the interim report concluded:

The end result is that departments and officials are not across the work that is happening internally.

For example, the First Assistant Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet's National Security Division was unaware that the COVID-19 taskforce was undertaking work to combat online disinformation and misinformation:

Work was going on at one hand that the other hand didn't know about.

The platforms themselves were confused as well. Representatives from TikTok did not know if they were required to report any coordinated foreign interference attempts that they detected on their platform, let alone who they could even report this to.

Amazingly, even if these entities had wanted to report foreign interference, the government had not let anybody know who they should possibly report it to.

This was December 2021. This is a government that had been not handling an issue for a number of years, some six months before the election at which they were booted out. And virtually nothing happened in between that time and that election. So for those opposite to come in here and criticise the government for having constituted a serious report from Home Affairs and for taking the time to work through that report is, quite frankly, remarkable.

And look at the minister who is in fact looking at the report. If you want to look at who is actually kicking the goals in this space, the minister responsible was announced 2022 cybersecurity person of the year by Cybercrime Magazine. I don't have time in 15 seconds to go through the full citation of all of her achievements, but the rest of the world is saying, 'This government is taking action in this space.' Those opposite didn't for a decade, and yet they have the gall to come in here and move this motion.

See this speech in context