Topics: Digital Duty of Care, calls for a review into taxypayer-funded grants
Kieran Gilbert: Joining me is the Shadow Communications Minister, Sarah Henderson. Do you welcome the fact that your opposite number, Anika Wells, is saying she’ll remove the ministerial discretion from the digital duty of care?
Sarah Henderson: Kieran, great to join you. I don’t welcome this bill at all. This is two years in the making, and the digital duty of care is a dog’s breakfast. It’s not just the ministerial powers, which, of course, the minister gave herself, in the exposure draft, unfettered powers to prohibit any category of online harm. But there’s dangerously vague definitions of online harm, there’s the sock puppet powers, which allow the creation of fake accounts to track people anonymously online by the eSafety Commissioner and researchers with no guardrails. And unbelievably, apart from this assault on free speech, this is an attack on free speech full and centre.
Kieran Gilbert: So this doesn’t improve the bill whatsoever?
Sarah Henderson: The bill is fatally flawed and it must be scrapped. The government must go back to the drawing board. But we are deeply concerned because there is a very insidious agenda to bring back the misinformation and disinformation laws. The prime minister admitted it. He let the cat out of the bag in New York when he said that’s part of where we want to go, they want to shut down voices that oppose them. They want to shut down the podcasters, their political opponents. This is a blank check for political censorship. We will not cop it.
Kieran Gilbert: What’s the way then to protect younger users of the internet in your view?
Sarah Henderson: I just wanted to make this point also, shockingly, Kieran, apart from this assault on free speech, the government has also removed the Online Safety Act mandatory codes and standards. So there’s a very broad regime where digital platforms and other online services are required to proactively remove and detect child sexual abuse material, other very serious unlawful material. Unbelievably, these codes and standards are being removed, and it’s been replaced by this vague duty of care. And of course, so all of the prescriptive obligations imposed on online services are now being completely gutted. Which means that if this bill was ever to see the light of day and be passed, Australians would be less safe online than they are at the moment. So I cannot believe how badly wrong Anika Wells has got this.
Kieran Gilbert: I want to ask you before you go. News24.com.au is reporting a series of highly inflammatory statements by the Melbourne Islamic Centre, linked to the pilot accused of attempting a 9/11-style attack on Israel, and this after the government gave that organisation more than $68,000 in taxpayer-funded grants. Pauline Hanson has said that the newly discovered posts from the mosque linked to the FlyDubai hijacker raise serious questions about the government’s vetting process. The government obviously didn’t even conduct a simple google search, let alone ASIO security checks, she says. What’s your reaction?
Senator Henderson: In fact, we’ve already raised very serious concerns about the issuing of grants to a range of multicultural organisations, including an organisation called OnePath, Jonno Duniam and I were very outspoken about this a number of months ago. This minister is giving out grants to organisations which are spreading hate, including this latest, of course, grant, without doing any due diligence. It’s an absolute shock. There must be a full review of every single grant that has been awarded because this is completely untenable.
Kieran Gilbert: Sarah Henderson, thanks for your time.