Kieran Gilbert: Let’s return now to politics here in Canberra. A lot to talk about with Zoe McKenzie and Andrew Charlton. Great to see you both. Zoe, let’s start with the social media ban, I had the Minister on earlier. She said they might legislate it, but not the age. They might put the age in place later, is that good enough?
Zoe McKenzie: Look, today is a great thought bubble. And should I say you had Andrew Wallace on earlier. He’s the person that should be given credit for this. He’s been talking about it for years, followed by Peter Dutton, who announced it in June, followed by Peter Malinauskas, who announced it last week, followed by the Prime Minister today. But with no detail; what age, which platforms, is YouTube in, is Reddit in, is Discord in? We don’t have any idea what this actually means, it’s just a popularity push to get us off what otherwise we might be talking about today.
Kieran Gilbert: You say popularity, but I think, Andrew, it’s fair to say it is popular, that a lot of parents would be talking to you about it. I know from a personal perspective, with pre-teen kids, it’s front of mind, and it should be somewhere where the Parliament, the politics can come together on, surely?
Andrew Charlton: Absolutely. I mean, every parent in Australia is talking about this. They’re worried about their kids’ safety online, and that’s why the Government is acting on this. You know, as Zoe says, we’ve been talking about this for a long time, but it’s one thing to propose an age limit. It’s quite another thing to propose an age limit that will work. Social media companies already have an age limit. That age limit is 13. And whether it should be 13 or 14 or 16, the important thing is to get a limit that is enforceable, because kids are smart, they can find their way around these limits, and they’re doing that right now. So what the Government is doing is actually creating an age limit that will work. And that’s why our age assurance trial is so important as a step to making a law that isn’t just an idea, but is an idea that will work and actually protect our kids.
Kieran Gilbert: The review done by Robert French, the former High Court Chief Justice for the Malinauskas Government, it does say this can be done, but as Andrew rightly points out, in many respects, it would be a first outside of the United States. I know a number of states in the US have tried it, and they’re in the courts, trying to implement it. So isn’t he right that there is a fair bit of detail that needs to be nailed?
Zoe McKenzie: Yeah, to be fair, it’s a different system in the United States. Look, we are in the middle of a social media inquiry at the moment as part of the Parliament. All options are on the table as to how best to execute from a technology perspective. We need to have a conversation, not just about social media, but about screen time in general. In my maiden speech, I spoke about this and the impact too much technology, too much screens had had, particularly in Melbourne kids through 264 days of lockdown. And then I ran a symposium last year on screen and gaming addiction and what that was doing really to brain development in young people. We know this has been an issue for a while and therefore we must get it right. No bandaid solutions in the run up to an election, so everybody feels like they’ve done something, but that it changes nothing on it.
Kieran Gilbert: So you agree with Andrew on that?
Zoe McKenzie: Absolutely, so the age assurance trial is a good start. It could have started a while ago, but that’s alright, it’s starting now. But let’s make sure we get it right.
Kieran Gilbert: And you believe it should be 16? You’re saying it?
Zoe McKenzie: Yeah, I do believe it should be 16. I mean, I’ve got people I’ve met with, constituents who prefer 18, frankly, but I think sixteen’s the right way. There’s enough maturity in an adolescent’s brain by 16 to be able to work out what’s good for them, how much is good for them. A bit of self-control, hopefully.
Kieran Gilbert: Why can’t the Government just say 16 and be done with it? Because the Minister’s saying, well, we might not land that before the end of the year. It might be the legislation followed by the age. There’d be a lot of people, a lot of families saying just get on with it. Do it, make it 16.
Andrew Charlton: Yeah, I think Australians do want to get on with this, but they want to get on with it in a way that will work.
Kieran Gilbert: What do you think, though? Should it be 16?
Andrew Charlton: I think we’re consulting with the industry and with other stakeholders and with parents to make sure that we find the right line. That won’t just be a good soundbite, won’t just be a good headline, will be something that will work, is backed by evidence, and be implementable. So, I do give Zoe credit for focusing on this for a very long period of time, including in her maiden speech. But I think it is right for the Government to do this in a way that is methodical, and which delivers a result that will work. And I think Australian parents would expect us to do that, not to quickly implement something which isn’t backed by research and ultimately isn’t backed by the science that makes it enforceable.
Kieran Gilbert: The French review, though, done for Malinauskas, has that basically fired things up? Has the South Australian Premier made this more urgent?
Andrew Charlton: I’m not sure that he’s made it more urgent, but certainly partnering with the South Australian Government is an effective way to make sure that we get lots of inputs into the national debate. And I give credit to the South Australian Government for focusing on this, for bringing the French review to bear. That’s a very useful input, but it’s one input into a process that we need to make sure is methodical so that the outcome sticks.
Kieran Gilbert: Yeah, okay, well, we want it to stick, but we also want it to happen. And so would you think the Coalition will be constructive in that? Because right now there’s not a lot of constructive policy – when it comes to the RBA, for example, Angus Taylor said, no, you can take that back.
Zoe McKenzie: My biggest fear is with this one is it’ll just be a bandaid between now and the election. The good thing about the social media inquiry is that it’s bringing all elements to the table. It’s not just social media and what it does, and particularly what it does to young people and their sense of wellbeing or mental health. It’s also a vector for extremism and radicalisation. So we must look at it across the board, we’ve been calling for that for some time. Make sure we get all the problems on the table and then we can talk about solutions after an election, hopefully with a Dutton Government.
Kieran Gilbert: What’s happening with the RBA reform?
Zoe McKenzie: Yeah, so, look, I think what’s happened is that the tone from Government on the RBA has changed dramatically in the last two weeks. So basically going to war with the Governor of the RBA. And so, frankly, I don’t think we trust them anymore. We don’t trust them not to stack a rate-based sub-board of the RBA Board to make sure that they get the decisions that they want. Because frankly, the narrative that we have seen from Jim Chalmers and particularly Wayne Swan in relation to the RBA has been a disgrace. They’re meant to be an independent arbiter, contributor to the wellbeing of the Australian economy – getting slammed by the Government!
Kieran Gilbert: Wayne Swan’s not the Government, though.
Zoe McKenzie: Isn’t he the President of the ALP these days? Isn’t he one of somebody that Jim Chalmers worked for?
Kieran Gilbert: Sure, but he’s not in the Government.
Zoe McKenzie: They’re still pretty close, mate, and he’s the one given permission to say what they’re really thinking as far as I can tell.
Kieran Gilbert: What do you say to that? Is this reasonable given the language that the Treasurer’s used recently?
Andrew Charlton: Well, the Liberal Party’s opposition to sensible reforms proposed by the Reserve Bank of Australia’s review shows how far the Liberal Party has gone in abandoning their traditional economic principles. Instead of supporting rational, sensible economic reforms, the Liberal Party is now off on a series of economic policies that are anti-business, anti-productivity and anti-economic growth. Think about the policies that the Liberal Party has proposed over the last few months. Splitting up airlines, attacking Bunnings for being too profitable, suggesting that we break up the supermarkets, attacking businesses left, right and centre. This is the most anti-business, anti-economic growth Liberal Party in Australia’s history. Peter Costello would be shocked to see the Liberal Party descend to this level. And I think most Australians wouldn’t recognise traditional Liberal principles.
Zoe McKenzie: I love it. I love when Andrew goes Liberal-lite on me. There’s nothing that cheers me up more than Andrew being Liberal-lite, claiming the economic management mantle for himself. But Andrew, I love it.
Andrew Charlton: Just, I’m pointing out that it is an extraordinary set of policies to see from the Liberal Party attacking business, proposing expensive government-funded energy systems. It’s a long way from the party of Peter Costello.
Kieran Gilbert: Thank you both. Zoe, Andrew, we’ll leave on that note.