February 21, 2023
SHARRI MARKSON: Let's bring in now Senator James Paterson. Great to have you with us, James. Look, I want to start with Malcolm Turnbull's evidence today. He claims that the foreign interference transparency legislation is failing, is not working. What do you think? Do you agree with this? And if so, what are the problems with it?
JAMES PATERSON: Sharri, thanks very much for having me. That's right. Malcolm Turnbull appeared before the Intelligence and Security Committee today because we're conducting a review of the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, which was introduced by his government when he was Prime Minister in 2018. And what he pointed out is what I strongly agree with, which is that what has been captured so far in the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme is people like him giving speeches in South Korea or Taiwan or people like Kevin Rudd being interviewed by the BBC. But what it hasn't captured is groups like the United Front Work Department, which is an agency of the Chinese Communist Party, which engages in manipulation and coercion of the Chinese diaspora overseas to try and corral them to support Beijing's political objectives. So, I think on an objective test, it has failed. It hasn't captured what it was supposed to, and it has captured things it was never focussed on and are really of no concern to the Australian community.
SHARRI: And is that the actual legislation that needs to change or the way the agencies are using it?
PATERSON: I think two things need to change. I think there are some common sense changes to the legislation that can be made to better target the intended conduct it's supposed to target. That is, non-transparent activities, particularly of authoritarian governments who are trying to covertly influence our political system. And we can make the task of the agencies a bit easier in implementing it by doing that. But also, there needs to be a big cultural shift in the way that it's been enforced by the Attorney-General's Department. Frankly, I think they've pursued the wrong targets and they haven't pursued the right targets with enough vigour. They told us today that the Australia Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China, which was ten years ago, the pre-eminent United Front Work Department in Australia, has only just been issued a notice under the Act requiring them to register. Now this is a group that everyone's known about. It was the notorious group that Huang Xiangmo was involved in – he's the political donor associated with the Sam Dastyari affair. Anybody in the street could have told you five years ago that they're a problem. This scheme's been in operation for almost five years, and it was only in January and then February that the first and then final notice was issued by the Attorney-General's Department. So, they could have pursued that target a lot earlier.
SHARRI: Look, we just seem so slow on so many national security issues and I was very critical, as you would have heard in my editorial earlier tonight. And if people have just changed it now, I spoke about how there are, you know, thousands of Chinese cameras, hundreds of them in government buildings and critical infrastructure and ASIO knew, ASD knew, Home Affairs knew not to put these Chinese cameras in their own buildings, but no one communicated that with the 88 politicians who had these Chinese cameras in their own offices. James, this was a security gaffe that you first pointed out. It needs to be closed.
PATERSON: Yeah, thank you, Sharri for your interest in this very important story, and I appreciate you promoting my work, because I think it's important that all Australians understand the risks that they are personally exposed to whether there's one of these devices in a private home or business or in a public area, let alone government. I have to say, though, I think you're a bit unfair on the ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess, and his organisation. Mike is a very dedicated public servant and very serious about his responsibilities to combat foreign interference and espionage. And I've worked very closely with him and admire his leadership on these issues. ASIO is an operational agency. They are not a policy agency and so they can provide input to wider government policies on questions like this. But it's not their responsibility to go around telling other government departments what they can and can't do. That policy, that responsibility now rests with the Attorney-General's Department under a policy called the Protective Security Policy Framework, and it is their responsibility to tell other government agencies what they can and can't do and they haven't been doing that. And I think that's a failing and they need to step up and do that.
SHARRI: Yeah, you are diplomatic. You have to defend Mike Burgess because you do work very closely with him. But it was your own questioning at Estimates, Senator Paterson, that pointed out this flaw and it was in your own questioning where Mike Burgess, where you said
to him, have you advised other government departments about this? And he said he hadn’t, and it wasn't top of his priority list. So, this is a big problem that no one's been advised about this...
PATERSON: I think that...
SHARRI: Have they, by the way, have they been taken...
PATERSON: You're right, Sharri...
SHARRI: Have they been taken out of those 88 political offices at this point?
PATERSON: You're right, Sharri. There is a problem here, and that is that government is a big beast and it's hard to coordinate. And to be fair to Mike Burgess or anyone else, he wouldn't even know that the Department of Finance had made a decision to go and install these devices. They wouldn't go and tell him or seek his permission. So, he and his officers would have no idea. And that is a problem. We do need to have much more robust frameworks across government to make sure that people have the expertise, whether it's ASIO or the Australian Signals Directorate or other arms of government, get that expertise to where it needs to be. And that's why central coordinating policy agencies like Home Affairs and like the Attorney-General's Department are so important. And that's why I'm so concerned that this Government has effectively demolished the Home Affairs portfolio and taken out so many of those core parts and distributed them across the public service. So, they're not sitting in one place. So, if you thought it was bad before and uncoordinated before, wait until you see what it's going to be like under these arrangements. To your direct question about the officers, yes, Finance is taking them out, but they haven't got all gone yet. They've only taken out about 20 so far. There's another 60 to go.
SHARRI: You found out that there's actually 36,000 cameras around the country.
PATERSON: That's right, Sharri. So, after I asked the federal government in my audit how many cameras they had, I thought I should do my attention to the broader Australian community because I am particularly concerned whether any critical infrastructure providers have them or any state and local governments. I used a software tool called Shodan, which can help identify any Internet connected devices and that show that there are at least 36,000 Hikvision devices that are Internet connected and at least 10,000 Dahua cameras that Internet connected. Now, that directly contradicts the advice from the Australian Signals Directorate, which says if you are going to have these devices, they should not be Internet connected and they're out there in the community. Now, some of those will be in private homes and businesses...
SHARRI: That's the problem. ASD, the spy agencies haven't told anyone. No-one knows. Not even politicians.
PATERSON: Well, again to be fair to ASD, they have put out advice as they were required to do under their charter through the Australian Cyber Security Centre on their website that says these devices should not be internet connected. But I think you are right. I think people genuinely don't know. I think some people will be shocked to learn that the cheap camera that they bought from a retail store and put out in their driveway or in their small business could be leaking that data back to the Chinese government. They would be shocked by that. And there is an important role for leadership of government here. I think it is incumbent on politicians to lead here. I'm pleased that the government has responded to my survey, my audit by getting rid of the federal government devices. I hope state governments follow, but I think it's also going to have push down that requirement to critical infrastructure providers.
SHARRI: We're out of time. But my point is, James Paterson, it shouldn't be up to you an Opposition Senator, to make such a noise about this that these cameras are pulled out of government buildings. This is not your job. This is the spy agencies job. Thank you very much for your time.
PATERSON: Thanks, Sharri.
ENDS
