Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 2:34:47 to 3:15:01
Officials address technical failures in mobile devices affecting emergency calls and the administration of journalism grants. The committee examines the impact of software updates on older Australians and the eligibility criteria for news media assistance.
Topics: Public safety, Grants administration
Speakers: Sarah Hanson-Young, Hon Sarah Henderson, Jim Betts, Andrew Hyles, Seaton Cairns, Andrew Verdon, Chris Fogarty, Clare Chapple, Margaret Lopez, Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Nita Green, Sarah Vandenbroek, Speaker 20
>> Thank you, Senator Hanson. just um chasing up on the um Apple the fix, what was the fix?
Um I could go into some detail on it if you wish. Um essentially what they um undertook was when uh update is occurring between u a manufacturer in this case Apple and a provider in Telstra they send out a level of information that includes what's known as a carrier bundle which is the sort of details that are inside the phone that applies directly to um that carrier and then as you'd understand Apple would have over a thousand carriers so they're all different bundles and they all have a digital ID ID attached to it. Um when in this instance the digital ID didn't read on those particular devices. So therefore it didn't understand that it was talking to a network um and that was the problem. So the fix was basically addressing the digital ID so that they could then um identify the network.
>> But did the fix have to be implemented by the individual who has the phone
>> and with a software update
>> which they proactively had to do
>> which was communicated through Apple and uh Telstra's channels
>> belatedly
>> once they knew the issue. Yeah. Once they knew the issue and once they had the fix.
>> So how do you how do we know how many of those phones have been updated?
Um,
>> oh, I was just going to say, so the the issue affected phones that had installed the update, the >> faulty update if you like. Um, and so the fix was to reinstall a new update with the correct information in there. So it wasn't all users of those phones, it was the ones that had installed the original update.
>> And that was the 14,000 devices that we
>> Yes. So the fix required individuals to proactively update the
>> as opposed to a normal software update that occurs through devices.
>> Yeah. >> So then how do we know how many people have done it?
>> Um as we've been advised through Telster and Apple is that they've notified all their people. We'd have to um ask Telster and Apple information. So
presumably there are there are some people who have phones that are are still not able to access triple0.
>> They don't no it wouldn't be able to access a call.
>> They wouldn't be able to work. They wouldn't make any calls.
>> Wouldn't make any calls.
>> Yes. So it's not a situation where you think you've got access to triple0 but in fact you don't which is the most dangerous circumstance. Your phone doesn't work.
>> Yes. >> yes. So your phone's not working. So you're getting a bit frustrated
>> and you and you're seeking ways of fixing it and that's where the information dissemination comes in. Um,
and has I mean some of those models were very old. >> Um, but iPhones are very expensive. Um, has Telster handed out any free phones to to people as a result of this?
>> Not that we're aware.
>> Not that we're aware of. Not at all.
>> No. As I said, once the software update is in place, the phones are fine.
>> I understand that. But we're talking about often older Australians who have the older model phones, >> you know. I mean, it's not their fault that the first update didn't work. >> Um, you can imagine how how confusing
>> but once it's fixed, they've got their phone back and it's working just as it was before. So, no,
>> if they know how to do that, Mr. Betts, or if they understand that's what's that's what they need to do. if their
phone stops working, then that's a call to do something about it.
I just I I guess this is, you know, we've had a long line of these issues over the last few months and it feels to me that despite all the promises that these big telecommunications companies um would make sure that the most vulnerable people are looked after, um I'm shocked at how few um Australians have actually um been helped out with updated and free devices despite the fact that they've all promised to do it. Do we have any sense across Optus, TPG or uh Telra how many people have been given um new phones as a result of their companies not being able to guarantee access to triple0.
>> We'd need to check, Senator, and come back to you on notice.
>> I think that would be good. Thank you. Um uh I've still got a little bit longer. Do I? >> Yeah. >> Six minutes. Okay. Um, >> on the duty of care bill.
>> One moment, Senator. We'll just change.
on the duty of care legislation. When do we expect that to be um tabled in the parliament?
>> We don't have any timing yet, Senator,
for that. So the the minister hasn't given you any direction as to when that should needs to be ready or a timetable for for legislation to be drafted.
>> No, we haven't received any instructions
Mr. Betts, is there still complaints within government departments around drafting resources? >> There are. that was that was something that was continued to be raised you know in the the last term
>> um matter for the attorney general's department um but some uh some considerable work has been undertaken which they could no doubt speak to around ensuring that uh OPC is given every opportunity to make best use of the resources it's got including by departments like ours making sure that when we go to OPC we have fully developed and fully considered policy proposals to reduce the burden on office of parliamentary council But it's not something unique to the Commonwealth government. Drafters are in short supply at state government level as well. In the case of the duty of care, uh that is something which is before government. We're not suggesting that it's constraints in drafting resources that are um uh compromising the timing of that legislation. It's rather about enabling cabinet to give it proper consideration.
>> Yeah. No, I'm just thinking there's quite a long list of pieces of legislation you've outlined for the 2026 program and if we don't have a timetable for when things are going to happen, how believable it is is it that any of it's going to happen?
>> Well, if you look at the legislative time uh program for 2025, that was ambitious too and we delivered a lot of stuff in that year. But um we are not the only department that wants legislation drafted. Um there is a lot going on across government and um it's for cabinet to set priorities around how drafting resources are
>> and they haven't they haven't prioritized duty of care as yet.
>> Well, it would come forward to cabinet and then decisions are taken on an ongoing basis about how drafting resources are prioritized and the attorney general's department can talk
>> Minister, when is the government proposing to introduce a duty of care? I mean, it's been promised for two years.
Well, I think as the secretary said, we're we're working on the legislation. Um we uh we will not you're not working
on the legis I mean
>> talk about the consultation we're undertaking.
>> We're consulting on the um particularly on the 67 recommendations from the online safety act review. um that's driving quite a lot of the conversation, but um uh as we've said, we've got an ambitious legislative program this year and um we'll be working to bring it forward as soon as possible.
>> Um is there a is is there an agreed objective of the duty of care bill? What what is the purpose of it from the government's
perspective? The purpose is to strengthen the online safety act and the framework for regulation to move from a reactive system where harms are dealt with after they've been identified to a more proactive system where the onus is on the platforms to proactively identify and mitigate risks that are known.
>> Mhm. Um and in order to do that uh what consideration is being given to the legal requirements of platforms to share their data and to make data available transparency.
>> Yeah, that's certainly an area that is of a lot of interest particularly to researchers. We're well aware of the interest in data access. So we are looking at different options. We know that there have been changes to the the content libraries that some of the platforms have have available over the last couple of years. And we know that some people feel that they're not as accessible and there's not as much data available as what there was previously. So it's something we have discussed with platforms and we are looking at different options for how we could make
>> Um yeah I don't think it's just about whether you know some people I mean it's a fact these companies have closed the door on transparency haven't they? They would
argue that they've brought in different schemes, but what we're hearing is that those schemes are not as effective.
>> Yeah, I don't think we trust anything in relation to the um social media ban and I obviously you know when the e safety commissioner is up there there's some obvious questions for for them as well but um there is nowhere for somebody to go to complain is there there's no complaint mechanism >> about what senator well about whether the ban has worked, hasn't worked, has had problems. You know, if a parent is um upset that their kid is still able to access um you know, Tik Tok uh and they're 14, who do they complain to?
>> Uh a lot of complaints are being made directly to the platforms. A lot of people are also contacting e safety and having conversations with them about their issues.
>> But e safety is not a complaints mechanism. is not is not set up to be a complaints handling um platform though, is it?
>> No, they're not.
>> No, they're not. And that why would you complain? Why would anyone have any trust of complaining to the plat to to Facebook or Meta or Tik Tok? I mean, these they don't give a damn about what's going on.
>> So, e safety is continuously monitoring the effectiveness of the social media minimum age as uh as uh which commenced on the 10th of December. So to the extent that it's receiving feedback from the community that is um reflected in its consideration around levels of compliance with the law, whether reasonable steps are being taken by platforms, methods of circumvention, migrations between platforms, every aspect of the design of the system um is being reviewed and continuously evaluated by e safety. So feedback from the community is important and will provide the basis for advice to government um as and when the um uh legislation or accompanying regulations come up for review in due course.
>> I I Mr. I I understand the point you're making that in terms of being able to pinpoint systematic problems obviously that information and feedback is helpful to the e safety uh commissioner but in terms of an individual parent or an individual young person it is they have nowhere to go do they?
>> Well I think as as Vanderbrook outlined the first the first point of contact would be to the entity providing the service to make a complaint to the
platform. Where who who do you complain to at Tik Tok if your kid is still accessing Tik Tok and they're under 16?
>> I understand that there are complaint mechanisms available through the platform. So I'm not familiar with the specifics of them, but that is the the usual avenue for people to complain is
I mean >> these are platforms who don't even respond to governments, don't respond to parliamentary inquiries, uh, you know, ignore uh subpoenas and you think that, you know, a young person or a or or or a parent is going to be able to access and have their complaint know where to put their complaint and have their complaint
commissioner operates within the framework which was established by the through legislation. So
>> yes, but the e- safety commissioner is not set up to take individuals complaints and to deal with them. There is no one who is who can do that. And so we we're just sending people back to the platforms of who do not give two hoots. They're not they don't care.
So, I'm not sure there's much that the public service can do to respond to that. The legislation is on the statute
>> chair, you can come back to me.
>> Thank you. Um, Senator Henderson or Smith, who am I going to >> uh to to me? Thank you very much. Sure, Chair. So I just wanted to ask about the com the delivery of all of the recommendations of the bean review. So there's been previous commitments made uh that including a response. Sorry I'm just just quickly checking here. So in a previous answer to a question on notice, we asked whether the minister or her office had made any representations about accelerating the implementation of the beam review. Uh and your response stated ACMA was issued with the ministerial direction on 21 August 24 to implement all recommendations by 1 November 25. So where is that at
So, Senator, uh, of the 18 recommendations of the bean review, all have been actioned bar three. One of the remaining three, um, recommendation 18 is in relation to a review of all legislation and regulation to do with the emergency call service. Um, the custodian has that on foot now. That is something that we will be initiating over the coming months. And the remaining two, I believe, although I will defer to my colleague, Mr. cans um are for industry to implement. Do you have any detail?
>> That's right. Seat and cans, acting assistant secretary uh custodian uh operations branch. Um that's correct. recommendations 14 and 15 uh with industry uh to deliver um temporary disaster roaming uh and um a memoranding of understanding for mutual assistance arrangements and those are in train um and uh proceeding uh well and I hopefully are quite close to
>> well when you say temporary disaster uh I mean surely this is also a role for
>> I think at this stage um given the the requirements of introducing um TDR. Um we've been working with the the network operators um to work out the best way that it can be implemented in a safe way um so that uh its functionality is is one that actually does no harm. Um
>> all right. Well, look, we on notice receive uh an update as to where those sorry not an update just the relevant correspondence in relation to those outstanding recommendations uh and also could we there was a direction as I mentioned I think would have been made to the former minister for communications um Ms. Rowland. Uh, could we get a copy of that ministerial direction issued by Minister Rowland? Then Minister Rowland, I
>> Is that Sorry, you mentioned one before. I just want to make sure we're getting the right one. That's in relation to implementation of the bean review recommendations. Yes, we'll take we'll
So uh in relation to the bean recommendations, what direction or instructions have been issued since Minister Wells took over the portfolio in May 25?
>> Directional instructions to
>> in relation to the implementation of those outstanding bean review recommendations.
>> Uh I'm not sure I would characterize them as instructions, Senator. Certainly the minister is incredibly interested and keen to see all of the recommendations progressed. Um it's something that we provide to her in status updates.
>> Well, Minister Rowland issued a ministerial direction. So my question is has a ministerial direction being issued by Minister Wells >> to the or or any other party in relation to those recommendations?
Not to my knowledge, Senator. No,
>> no, Senator. The minister did write to the um telecommunications providers about those two outstanding um uh recommendations, but that was um not not a formal I wouldn't characterize that as a formal direction.
>> Could we just get a copy of that correspondence as well, including any other correspondence or advices or briefs?
>> We'll add that to the material we've already taken on notice in respect to
centerpiece of the minister's action on being review recommendations has been the establishment by statute of the custodian the resourcing of that and its full operation operationalization now
>> and has there been any response received from the telecommunications carriers to the minister's letter
>> I understand yes
>> and what is that response
>> we can include those details as part of the answer to the question
>> so do you have a timeline for the implementation ation of of disaster roaming. I mean this is a critical question particularly if for Australians living in disasterprone areas, areas of high bushfire risk that the need to have access to all the support they need in times of disaster is critical.
>> Yeah. So it relies on interoperability between the different um mobile network operators and as has been explained that's at an advanced stage. We understand the importance of it. Um, and we will give you the information you've requested on notice.
>> Okay. Can we also get a copy of the responses from the telecommunications companies? >> As well and if it's possible to bring that to the table today,
>> we'll see what we can do in the time we have. Otherwise, we'll add it to that bundle of material.
>> Thank you. >> And I'm looking forward to receiving it before 9:30 on the morning of the next estimates. Treasure >> Secretary,
>> we do have an answer um to one of your questions about outage notification numbers which we can provide to you now
if you like.
>> Yeah. No, so the department understands, Senator, that from uh 1 July 2025 to 31 January 2026, it was just under 2,000 um outage notifications provided to the department. Um I think the number I've got here is uh 1,973.
>> And we can give you a breakdown. We haven't got it now, but we can give you a breakdown per um telco if you would
>> Uh look, I I just wanted to I just wanted to return to the disaster roaming. So there was a absolute commitment by the former minister that this would be implemented by the 1st of November. What's the reason for the
Um I think um in terms of the progress on um temperature disaster roaming uh I understand a first phase of testing was completed in December last year um which the the TCO providers have been working through the data of that um and and a a putting together a paper for for government immittently on on how that uh progressed. Um we're hoping that a second phase of real world testing should take place very soon. um I I believe February or a very the first quarter of calendar year 26 which should provide additional useful insights into um the roll out of TDR and how it can proceed um so that's it it's safe and and um I guess can can be rolled out um before the the next high-risk uh weather season um starting one October.
Uh, can I just quick I'm going to move through my questions as quickly as I can. Where is the government up to with the trial of a text messaging service to contact Triple0?
>> Uh, yes. I might call my colleague Mr. Fogerty to the table. Um,
>> there was a there was a trial. There was discussion about a trial. Was that
>> that's correct a text relay to trip0 um rather than text direct. Um, Mr. FORD and his team have been working through that procurement process and I'll just let him get settled and he can give you an
>> Yeah. Uh in regards to the SMS uh relay pilot um we are working closely with a uh potential provider that was undertaken through a tender process and
we are working towards a contract negotiation.
>> So that trial is not yet underway. >> Again on notice if we could have all correspondence in relation to the establishment of that trial. Uh when will that be underway?
contract negotiation with the potential provider and then there's uh a little to cover and have enough capability to undertake the trial.
>> And when is it feasible that this could be operating and available to all Australians?
>> Uh we're trying to get it up and running as soon as possible. However, we believe we should have a contract in place uh
>> Uh just back to the triple0 uh custodian division will of next month u being established within the department for one year. Can the department table a detailed account of the custodian's activities since the 30th of October 2025 including how it's responded to recent triple0 issues? I'm happy to take that
on notice. We have provided a submission to um the committee on exactly that just in the last few days
>> uh to the triple0ero inquiry. cover the essence of that question. Senator,
>> it will >> it will. We're also looking to publish a progress report for the first quarter of
>> Well, we'd like the progress report now if if that's possible. So I understand that
>> my preparation.
>> Yeah. So if you could extract that data so we can have that tabled as soon as possible on notice. two more questions very quickly. >> Is that the end of your questions on this outcome? >> Notice someone on this block.
>> Oh, okay. Then I'll move the call. Um now Senator Han,
>> um I'm just wondering whether there was any and I'm sorry if Senator Henderson asked this while I was out of the room. was there any triple0ero service impacted by yesterday's Optus outage?
>> Senator, um, one thing, it's a very recent event. I think one thing that we can say with confidence about the outage yesterday is that it did not affect trip0. Mhm. >> Um I think it's too soon to say with confidence what the nature of the outage is, but our information is that it did not affect the ability to call triple0 campon facility continue to operate.
>> And how quickly was the department made aware of the outage
>> incredibly quickly. Um, one of the the pleasing aspects was um the opt called our on duty officer hotline um let them know immediately about the outage, provided the details and continued to update us as they're working through it.
>> So there was no um missing email yesterday.
>> I don't believe so. No.
>> Okay. All right. Good. Um could I come back to the questions I was asking about um duty of care and the duty of care bill? I I'm I'm keen to understand what work Thank you, Miss I'm keen to understand what work is being done between the Australian government and uh other jurisdictions. You've mentioned the UK, but what about Europe? We know they've got some of the the strongest uh regulations in relation to um online platforms.
>> Senator, I think in in Mr. Hulls's earlier evidence, he did refer both to
looking at your the EU model
>> is there I mean what what type of engagement are you having with with
>> So um Senator, it won't surprise you that over a number of years we've had engagements with kind of uh with officials from both the EU and uh UK. So, um it's more of an ongoing kind of um dialogue with them. Um as I said, we have um regular engagements with the UK. Um uh I think we're talking probably at least every, you know, at least every month.
>> The UK the UK legislation's much weaker than what we've got in um the EU and indeed in um uh specific EU jurisdictions. Would you agree with
that? So, we've definitely heard um uh views from stakeholders that suggest that um uh the EU model as a kind of a broad-based duty of care is a stronger model. Um but we've also heard from stakeholders that there are kind of advantages to the UK approach um because they the regulator works quite closely with platforms to ensure that they are complying with their their duties of
>> You mean like co-regulation?
Uh well as I understand it um the the the regulators kind of provide quite extensive guidance to to um industry about how they comply with their duties of care.
what about so you I've asked about algorithms and what um whether there's a um desire to give people the option to opt out of algorithms. We haven't got a government position on that. Uh but are you looking at how those rules could be implemented properly?
>> So we're certainly looking at um as I think Miss Vandenbroek mentioned before a very broad range of kind of um things that came out of the online safety act review. Um so looking at kind of how those could be implemented and embedded in kind of a duty of care in effect. So we're looking at a range of different kind of options and opportunities.
>> And what about holding executives of these platforms responsible? I mean uh we say Meta, we say Google, we say Tik Tok, but you know unless somebody's actually held legally responsible, behavior of these corporations doesn't change.
>> So that's for example one of the approaches that the UK has taken. So they do hold um executives to account or they they have the power to hold um executives to account for systemic and serious breaches of their duties of care
>> like criminal negligence. >> Yes. Um is that something the that you're you're considering?
>> Um we've certainly looked at it. So um but in terms of the advice that we provide to governments, obviously that's subject to cabinet confidentiality.
of course, when the E safety commissioner uh tried to take Twitter to court and you had Elon Musk, they're just parading around the world calling um uh our officials, you know, a whole variety of exploitives and um names. uh it showed that if you don't actually hold individuals to account, there's So what what what is there work being done on having making sure there's some kind of legal footing in Australia so that there's some onshoring of these companies so that you can actually enforce these laws.
So Senator um uh obviously um penalties, compliance and enforcement is something that we are actively looking at. Um uh the review made recommendations around kind of ensuring or needing to ensure that there are you know very serious kind of consequences for systemic and and serious breaches of of the duty of care for example. Um so we're we're actively considering it. And what about
the promotion of you know hatred and misogyny, sexism, you know, can we hold these
>> I mean that
>> people these these tycoons to account?
>> So I mean the nature of a duty of care would be kind of going to those systemic kind of um uh ways that they kind of um uh develop and present their platforms and services. So you know we would be saying that um as I think Miss Brand Vanbrook mentioned earlier that um the expectation is that platforms would need to take proactive steps to ensure that their services are safe and that would go to things like kind of um you know um if if services were kind of perpetuating hate speech and that kind of stuff.
>> And who then ends up being responsible for making that happen? I mean is that an ACMA enforcement? Is that
>> e safety
>> e- safety? So the so the e safety commissioner's remit's going to have to change.
>> Yes. So I mean there would obviously need to be kind of fairly extensive legislative amendments to the online safety act to kind of implement a duty
when are we going to see the full published review of the of the e safety um the online safety review? We still haven't had that published properly, have we?
>> The review itself has been published. that was done last year, but the government response has still been worked through to look at across all 67 recommendations, how they might be sequenced and what the interactions are between the different recommendations. There's quite a lot of analysis to to understand the depth and breadth of all of the 67 recommendations.
>> And yet what you're telling me though is that you're working on responses, but we open transparent government response.
>> Not as yet. No.
>> And is is that coming or is that is it just going to keep being kind of peace meal the way this is?
>> Government is committed to introduce a legislated duty of care and we've undertaken consultation and Miss Vandenbroek described that in some detail earlier on
>> but there are other recommendations than just that
>> and as Miss Vandenbroek said we are still um working through the detail of a response to each of those recommendations including how they
uh could I ask about um totally different topic the um news media bargaining code and news incentive
>> change personnel.
>> We'll make preliminary point that um Treasury has to lead on policy for these
so you've had the you you've had the um levy out for consultation. Um, submissions have closed. I think that's right. That's what you told me earlier today. Um when do we expect a um a a response?
>> Uh Senator as um as uh Mr. Bet said um this work is being led by the Treasury. >> Um I don't think they have confirmed a time in terms of um when those consult the submissions will be considered and and next steps >> on that process
>> likely to be release of an exposure draft of legislation. that there are government processes to be gone through before we get to that point.
>> Okay. Um and when do the contracts with Meta and Google and various um news agencies expire or or run out?
>> Um Senator, those are commercial um deals that were entered into with um those platforms. Um I don't think we've got visibility in terms of
>> I don't think that's true, Miss Lopez. Surely you do. We all know it's like March, April, and then these news companies are going to start laying off staff and firing journalists. That's why this is urgent. You're telling me the department doesn't know the time frames of these contracts.
>> We're explaining the commercial confidentiality that surrounds those contracts. And if you have further questions, direct them to Treasury.
So the communications minister is not aware of the impact of the expiring contracts and what they're going to mean for journalists in Australia.
>> One of the uh comments that has been extensively made around the news media bargaining code relates to the confidentiality of the deals that are done um between um platforms and the news providers.
>> Yes. But it is also the the the minister's job to make sure there is a there that there is a viable news landscape in this country.
>> Correct. And we can talk to you about um the news media assistance program and we can talk about the support for Associated Press and we can talk about journalism assistance fund but lead responsibility for the um news bargaining incentive and indeed for the news media bargaining code rests with the assistant treasurer. Has the
minister been briefed um or have you as the department briefed the minister on how many journalists are going to get the sack this year unless something is unless something new is put in place?
>> Senator, we've been providing advice to the minister in terms of um news and journalism across a range of issues.
>> Are you worried that hundreds of journalists are going to be laid off
this year? Um, Senator, in in December 2024, the government announced quite extensive um funding in relation to um news and journalism. This includes um over $99.1 million um which has been provided over 3 years from 2526. Um Mr. Betts uh just mentioned the journalism assistance fund um the first tranch of sector grants um which were worth 67.6 6 million open for applications in November last year um and closed in December um with payments commencing in December last year as well.
>> Um can you give us a list of the payments that have been distributed and which media media agencies?
>> Um Senator in terms of those um those grants they are published on grants connect.
>> Yeah. Can can you table a copy of that please? has the minister sought any advice as to what the media landscape will look like if Meta and Google do not uh resign contracts with Australia's media
>> Um, Senator, as Mr. Bet said that in terms of next steps and what um in terms of the work that Treasury is doing in terms of news media bargaining and the and the incentive that is a matter for the Treasury.
>> I I understand that but you
>> the incentive is designed um is intended to support Australia's news sector by incentivizing large digital platforms to renew or enter into commercial deals with news organizations as envisaged by the news media by code. So that is precisely the intent of the incentive.
>> I understand that Mr. bets. The problem is is that the money's run out now and
>> we've talked to you about the uh financial assistance that we're providing and we've talked to you about the process that Treasury is following to develop the incentive.
under the incentive program uh is there any companies that are receiving taxpayer money that don't pay tax in Australia?
Sorry. Under which program? Senator?
>> Well, it any of the the grants programs that Miss Lopez has just referenced or any of the money that uh may come from the uh incentive scheme. Um Senator in
terms of the grants um in terms of the grants that have been provided under uh news map um there's a range of eligibility criteria um which goes to uh things like the production of core news. in terms of taxation arrangements that's not something that the grants um consider. Um the the journalism assistance fund though is um designed to fund journalists um and that's the intent of that program.
>> That's so it could be going to medi companies that are not Australianowned or don't pay any Australian
>> tax. Senator just in terms of that clarification it is um it is only for um Australianowned um news and journalism um organizations.
>> Andrew Verden, acting assistant secretary for the news and journalism branch. The guidelines do state that uh excluded from uh these grant programs including the journalism assistance fund is a foreign controlled Australian entity. So they're excluded.
>> Mhm. Okay. Um can I ask about uh any further uh work that's being done on supporting the independent newswire AAP?
Uh so uh Senator um as part of the uh news media assistance program that was announced in 2024 uh further funding of 3 33 million has been committed to the Australian Associated Press under the newsmap program. Uh the first payment of 7 million was provided to AAP in August 2025 and a second payment will be made in April this year on receipt of a report. uh then the remaining 22 million will be provided over the next two
and does the government have a position on whether having an independent newswire is important for the public
>> Senator, I think our commitment of $33
million indicates our support for
Um, chair, I think we can, depending on how many other questions other people have, I could put the rest on notice.
>> Um, that would be fantastic.
>> Move on to ACMA.