Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thirty-three billion dollars. That's what a constituent believed was being spent on First Nations programs per year. I corrected him with the figure of $5.3 billion spent specifically on First Nations programs. I obtained that figure from the Parliamentary Library. In the time it took me to have that conversation on his doorstep, how many eyeballs had viewed this misinformation, or is it disinformation? He had received this from a friend, and the question is: where did she get it from? Was it a threat actor pushing an agenda to skew the results of the upcoming referendum?

During the pandemic, while I was caring for sick patients in hospital, I was being asked if Ivermectin or oxygen therapy were protective against COVID. The people who ended up on ventilators had rejected vaccination in favour of crack-pot theories circulating online. In both scenarios, harm is the outcome and it's not trivial.

A 'no' vote based on misinformation is a vote for more of the same. An acceptance of premature death. An acceptance of rheumatic heart disease in children when it's been eliminated elsewhere in our community. An acceptance of double the suicide rate. An acceptance of incarceration rather than university as the destiny for young Indigenous men. These are not abstract concepts for First Peoples, they are realities. How would Australians feel about being manipulated to vote 'no' by malicious actors, foreign or domestic? How would they even know?

Misinformation and disinformation left unchecked is a threat to our safety and wellbeing, our economy and our democracy. It can tear at the social fabric of our society; undermine public trust in our institutions, public health and safety; and disrupt our economy. Foreign interference is a significant national security threat, and generative AI with its near-realistic images and proficient chatbots has only exacerbated the challenge. Social media platforms are not just key communication channels, they are now the public square but with limited moderation.

Despite Australia's world-leading efforts to counter foreign interference, initiated under the former government, it is evident that there is more to do, especially with AI bearing down on us and the geostrategic landscape shifting beneath our feet. Industry has made some progress. Digital platforms, including Apple, Google, Microsoft, TikTok and Twitter, have opted into a voluntary self-regulatory code of practice developed by industry, but the ACMA's report card in 2021 and 2023 found that additional regulatory power was needed, complementing the ACCC's recommendation in 2019.

Principally, this legislation is about encouraging digital platforms to better counter the spread of misinformation and disinformation, rather than the ACMA overtly regulating the content itself. The proposed bill will enable the ACMA to gather information or require digital platforms to provide those records to the ACMA; enable the ACMA to request that industry develop a code of practice, which the ACMA would register and enforce; and allow the ACMA to create and enforce an industry standard, should a code of practice be deemed ineffective.

Importantly, the ACMA does not have power to request specific posts be removed, nor will it have a role in determining what is considered truthful. The DIGI managing director said:

… it formalises our long-term working relationship with the ACMA in relation to combatting misinformation online.

The former chair of the ACCC Rod Sims said:

Claims the government's bill is about censorship of opinion not only misunderstands the legislation but also illustrates a naive understanding of the threats to our society and our democracy.

It seems that the Liberals agree. On their website they have stated that a re-elected Liberal coalition government will introduce 'stronger laws to combat harmful disinformation and misinformation online by giving the media regulator stronger information-gathering and enforcement powers'. But, now, in their desperation to crawl back to power, they fall back on familiar habits: the scare campaign.

In saying that the government should bin the bill, are the Liberals saying that we should do nothing? Are the Liberals suggesting that we should leave the Australian regulator powerless in the face of this evolving threat? Are they suggesting we sit idly by as foreign interference infects our devices, hearts and minds? Are the Liberals suggesting that we should just leave digital platforms to make up their own rules? They would rather go soft on big tech and give foreign interference a free pass than work in the national interest. While '$33 billion' was wrong, there are 26 million reasons to get this right.

See this speech in context