David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Hansard source

I want to talk about the media bargaining code. When in government, the coalition put in place the news media bargaining code, and what this did was say, 'If you are a social media company and you are taking the intellectual property of Australian media publishers, you must pay for it.' Simple—right? If you are using the product of journalism that doesn't come for free and you're using that to build your business, you should pay for it. Famously, of course, the Treasurer at the time, Josh Frydenberg, went toe to toe with Mark Zuckerberg and had a series of interactions with Mr Zuckerberg. Facebook threatened to withdraw from the country; they did not and they paid for Australian journalism. That's what should have happened and what did happen.

My speech tonight will largely consist of quotes from government ministers, because it's a confusing picture; it's a picture of delay and malaise. If we go back to 18 December last year, the Assistant Treasurer said:

But let us be very clear: we already have the power to designate digital platforms and we are prepared to use it.

We want to see news outlets and digital platforms come together and negotiate in good faith.

He's saying there that he has the legal power through the news media bargaining code to force the tech giants to the bargaining table. That's what he said in December. On 1 March this year, Meta announced that it would stop paying Australian media companies for their intellectual property. On that day the Minister for Communications and the Assistant Treasurer put out a joint statement. Let's hear what they had to say on that day, which was more than six months ago:

Meta's decision to no longer pay for news content in a number of jurisdictions represents a dereliction of its commitment to the sustainability of Australian news media.

They went on to say, ominously:

The Government has made its expectations clear.

That kind of implies something's going to happen, doesn't it? That was 1 March, more than six months ago. They said:

This will be devastating to Australian publishers. It will have a profound impact on the quality of news media in this country—in terms of its impact and reach in the Australian community.

They're right.

On 25 April this year, the Assistant Treasurer said that social media companies had a 'social responsibility'. He said:

There needs to be a place where people can go and get fact-tested, reliable information. In Australia, journalism is one of the critical sources of that information.

He also said:

If people are going to Facebook or other social media platforms for that information, then they should be able to get it there.

On the same day, 25 April, in the Guardian, the communications minister was quoted as saying she was confident the government would 'get a result' in the code negotiations. How long is that? That's 4½ months ago.

On 3 May in the Guardian, the communications minister said:

We remain committed to the outcome, which is that we have a strong, sustainable public interest journalism-based media in Australia. And we're committed to the code process.

On 5 May in the Australian, the Assistant Treasurer said:

Meta seems more determined to remove journalists from their platform than criminals.

They're talking tough. He's saying that Meta is treating journalists worse than criminals. Again, it implies he's going to actually do something, doesn't it? That was 5 May, four months ago. He went on to say to the Australian:

The government has publicly and privately made our position to Meta very clear: Australian news media businesses should be fairly remunerated for news content used on digital platforms.

It was four months ago that he said that.

On 16 June, it was a little bit softer from the Assistant Treasurer, in the Australian:

I am awaiting Treasury's advice and will have more to say once I've considered both briefings.

But he sort of bucked himself up on 28 June, when he said to the Financial Review that the government would 'not be held ransom by multinational companies who blatantly threaten to avoid' Australian law. Again, he was talking tough. On 31 July, not long ago, he said a 'whole-of-government response' was expected shortly. He said:

… it won't end there, and you can expect us to have something to say about that in the near future.

More than six months have passed.

On 1 March the government said that all resources and all ministers would be deployed on the issue but, on 3 December, it was revealed that Meta had offered to speak to the Prime Minister. He said 'no'. On 4 September it was revealed the only minister who has engaged with Meta was the Assistant Treasurer. This issue has gone on for far too long. The powers are there. The government needs to resolve this issue and protect Australian journalism.

See this speech in context