The ban on TikTok from government devices in Australia should be extended to the devices of government contractors, and should also cover WeChat, a parliamentary committee has recommended.
The Senate committee examining foreign interference on social media said in its report tabled on Tuesday that it had been “particularly concerned” with the “unique national security risks” posed by companies like TikTok and WeChat “whose parent companies ByteDance and Tencent respectively, are irrefutably headquartered in and run from authoritarian countries like China”.
The committee said China’s national intelligence law means the Chinese government can require these companies to secretly cooperate with Chinese intelligence agencies.
The committee previously heard from TikTok that China-based employees can access Australian user data, but the company said there were checks in place to ensure approval for the data went through the US-based employees of the company.
The committee, chaired by the Liberal senator and shadow cyber security minister, James Paterson, recommended that if the US government forced ByteDance to divest its stake in TikTok, then the Australian government should consider ensuring TikTok Australia is also separated from its parent company.
The government should also extend the TikTok ban on government devices to all government contractors who have access to Australian government data, the committee said, and the government should consider extending the ban to WeChat.
The White House in the US issued a new rule in June banning government contractors from having TikTok on employee devices, after the government-wide ban late last year. The AFR reported last month that a number of consultancy firms in Australia had also issued a pre-emptive ban on the app on their devices.
The committee also recommended social media platforms should abide by a set of transparency rules including having an Australian presence, labelling state-affiliated media, and disclosing content censorship or takedowns and government directions about content on their platforms.
The social media companies should face fines if failing to meet the minimum transparency requirements, the committee said, and as a last resort, they should face a ban from the country by the home affairs minister.
Paterson told the Senate on Tuesday that the health of social media networks directly affects the health of the country.
“Foreign authoritarian states know this. They do not permit free debate on their own social media platforms. They use ours as a vector for information operations to shape our decision-making in their national interest – at the expense of our own,” he said.
“Not all social media platforms are the same. The ability for a social media platform to be weaponised varies according to the laws of the country from where it is headquartered.”
Ella Woods-Joyce, TikTok’s director of public policy for Australia and New Zealand, said while the company disagreed with some of the characterisations and statements made about TikTok, it welcomed that there was no Australia-wide ban recommended.
“We are also encouraged that recommendations largely appear to apply equally to all platforms,” she said. “TikTok remains committed to continuing an open and transparent dialogue with all levels of Australian government.”
A spokesperson for WeChat’s parent company, Tencent, said the company was reviewing the findings of the report.
“WeChat is committed to protecting user privacy and providing its users with a safe, secure and diverse platform for communicating with friends, family and businesses,” the spokesperson said.
“While we disagree with the depiction of WeChat in the report, we will continue to work with stakeholders in Australia to address any further concerns and ensure Australians can continue connecting with others through WeChat.”
Labor and the Greens did not provide any dissenting views in the report, but in additional comments the government senators Jess Walsh and Raff Ciccone said while they endorsed the transparency framework proposed, they noted a blunt nation-wide ban of specific apps would not be effective, and would lead to a game of “whack-a-mole” with new apps popping up to replace those banned in Australia.
They said any further bans on government devices should be informed by advice from security agencies.
Greens senators Sarah Hanson-Young and David Shoebridge said any proposal should be platform-neutral, and not target specific apps.
“We urgently need a platform-neutral approach to policy because targeting a single platform based on the country it is linked to does nothing to protect Australians from foreign interference,” they said.
