It’s fantastic to be here at Apple headquarters in California, and I do want to thank Tim Cook for the invite, firstly, after we spoke in June, but also for getting together the entire executive team. It was a very fruitful discussion that we had, and then to be able to see the latest products is very important as well.
One of the things that I’m not sure has been recognised fully in Australia is just the way that Australia is seen to have led the world when it comes to protecting children from some of the negative consequences of access to social media and new technology. And that was certainly recognised by Mr Cook when we spoke in June, and was recognised again today. Apple themselves are producing new products to empower parents to be able to protect their children, and we’ve seen those products are now available in Australia, but they are very new. What they will do is enable parents to be able to limit the time spent on particular apps, the time spent on their iPhone or devices, to restrict access to who can message children, to protect, other measures as well as we go forward. And seeing that firsthand was really important today.
We were also able to go through what Australia is doing, the next steps, particularly with the My Feed, My Way, as part of our legislation that we have put out already in exposure draft form, all about making sure that people are in control of the algorithms that they receive. This is about empowering people over new technology, and that’s a thing that the world is grappling with. With artificial intelligence, with social media, with all of these devices as well. It’s been the thought not just of government leaders, but, of course, of the papal encyclical as well earlier this year. So, this is something that requires the whole of society to have a debate over.
My government wants to make sure that we get the balance right, that we empower people, whilst recognising the many benefits that new technology can bring. The iPhone and Apple’s products have changed the world. They’ve changed the way that we engage with each other and have brought enormous benefits. And there are enormous benefits, of course, from artificial intelligence. To name just one, an obvious one: the benefit for healthcare provision. AI can enable cancer detection, a full range of health issues, better diagnosis and, therefore, better outcomes as well. But we do need to make sure, with all of these new technologies, that people remain in control, and that is something that my government is determined to do.
But it was a proud moment today, I’ve got to say, when the head of a major company that has changed the world, like Tim Cook from Apple, recognises the leadership that Australia has shown. And that’s leadership, of course, that has come from parents who’ve dealt with personal tragedies and have channelled that personal tragedy into wanting other families to not go through what they have gone through, just as Apple have consulted on their new equipment and controls with paediatricians, with experts as well, to make sure that they get it right. And I think parents will certainly welcome these new initiatives.
JOURNALIST: I mean, PM, just asking on AI. Overnight, back home, Anthropic’s joined the calls from OpenAI, criticisms of proposed copyright provisions at home, threatening to withdraw or go slow on investment if they don’t get what they want on copyright. What’s your message to them?
PRIME MINISTER: My message is that we’re determined, as I said a couple of months ago at my speech at Sydney University. We want people to be in control of what is their own property, their creativity. Whether it be writers or musicians, they need to, one, be in control, but secondly, as well, they also need to be properly remunerated if content is used. So, we’ll work through those issues. We think that there is a way through. We’ve actually had constructive discussions to make sure that we can shape the way that that occurs, rather than be just, if you like, powerless. I want to make sure that Australia plays a role in this, is forward-leaning, and that’s what we have aimed at doing, and we’re engaged constructively. If you look today at what Apple have produced to empower parents to protect their children, then that’s an example of the private sector following government’s lead, and that’s very positive.
JOURNALIST: Do you accept, Prime Minister, that opting out might not be the best way to go? That the AI tools have already scraped a lot of intellectual property to this point, and that opting out just allows them to continue to train their tools on information they’ve already taken?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, the point that you make shows the need to regulate and the need as well to acknowledge that sitting on the sideline is not an option, because this is a global phenomenon that we are having. And that’s why AI, when it comes to all of these issues, there’s three components, really. One is companies themselves making sure that they have proper safety protocols in place. Secondly is nation-states and their capacity to have AI standards, and like I said we’ll have legislation before the end of the year on Australian AI standards. Part of that will be protecting intellectual property. The third, and something that is being discussed this week and has already been the subject of interaction between leaders who’ll be attending the UN this week, is what’s the international framework as well to take advantage of the benefits, but also to mitigate the risks.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister do you accept, though, that if AI companies are saying that we can only maximise the capacity of AI by sharing our data, that is troublesome, given the existential threat that Anthropic and others say AI poses?
PRIME MINISTER: Sorry?
JOURNALIST: Do you accept, though, that there is great risk in us giving data to AI companies, given that there is an existential threat, according to the very same companies?
PRIME MINISTER: I certainly accept that there are risks, and that’s why we need to mitigate them. That’s why we need to act, and that is something that’s recognised by the companies themselves.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, how does Australia’s middle-power commit other countries to kind of act in an effective way, when we have Donald Trump, the leader of this very country, saying there’s no need to regulate or put in guardrails around AI? Like, how important is his role in this sort of endeavour?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, individual leaders will speak for themselves. What I do is I speak for Australia’s national interests, and Australia’s national interests are served by us engaging, by us recognising that there are risks which need to be mitigated. That is something that we will continue to pursue, and something that is common. The discussions that I’ve had with leaders already in the lead-up to this week’s meeting, I think you’ll see some statements this week emerge as well from nations that recognise that we need to work together and cooperate. When we put forward the social media ban, we were the first in the world. There are now 20 countries, at least, have implemented some form of legislation or controls as well in order to protect children. And we see, with Apple’s new products, all designed at protecting children as well. So Australia has led, will continue to lead, but will continue to engage constructively as well, both with the private sector and with other governments.
JOURNALIST: You said before that tech companies need to be competitive in terms of making sure that, you know, their products are safe and that, you know, children are protected online. But given how a lot of these apps, like, they work with each other, would that mean that tech companies would have to work together to make sure that, you know, things aren’t bypassed on one platform, for instance? Given that these big tech companies, they’re trillion-dollar companies, some of the biggest in the world, with, you know, GDPs bigger than some countries, how do you convince those tech companies to work together, given that they’ve got their own priorities and interests there?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, the tech companies, of course, do have their own commercial interests, but they also have an interest in having social licence. What we’ve seen here as well today, what I saw this morning, was demonstration of how it’s not just the apps or use of AI, but the devices themselves can be changed in a way that protects people. We’ve seen the capacity of Apple to do that with the parental controls and with the new features that are on their new designs, that also talk to their own products. So, an iPhone that a parent has could talk to not just the iPhone of their children, but iPads as well, and things such as being able to switch off the time in which a child can be on a device, limit the time in which they can use a particular app. So, for example, they can close off games and other apps for particular times in the morning when they’re preparing for school. The capacity of technology companies to work through challenges, I believe that they do have that. What we need to do as governments, though, have a particular role to ensure that that occurs, that they’re fulfilling their social responsibility, because that’s how they get a social license.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you are in the UN talking about the climate change and tech agenda, but you are coming under growing criticism over your Indigenous affairs agenda. Megan Davis is the latest Indigenous leader to accuse your government of not showing leadership on protecting children in remote communities, after a series of revelations in The Australian showed that child protection agencies had failed to intervene when born children in Port Hedland were living in squalor and even at risk of abuse and murder. Do you think Indigenous children in remote communities are being failed by systemic issues within child protection agencies?
PRIME MINISTER: Sounds very much like not just a domestic question, but a question –
JOURNALIST: It’s part of the issues the UN considers.
PRIME MINISTER: Relating to – well, it hasn’t been relayed to me at the UN at all. And, of course, as – as you know, Greg, state governments have responsibility for child protection –
JOURNALIST: Is this a time for a greater role for – for federal intervention in this space, as Megan Davis is calling for?
PRIME MINISTER: Malarndirri McCarthy will respond to that.
JOURNALIST: But, Prime Minister, in fairness, are you able to respond?
PRIME MINISTER: Malarndirri McCarthy, the minister, is the appropriate person to respond. So you’ve got –
JOURNALIST: Nothing to say about all these allegations?
PRIME MINISTER: I’ve got a lot to say when I’m in Australia about all of these issues.
JOURNALIST: I’m just following up on Jane’s question around other countries moving on AI. Gavin Newsom announced, I think, while we were in the air coming here, that he would legislate to make – to enforce the kill switch on AI. The EU commissioner last week said that the EU was going to take a leading role on regulating, and they’ve already done rules around the algorithms on social media. Can you tell us who you’ve been speaking to on this, and how much of a leadership role are we actually playing, given there’s a lot of people saying that they’re leading on this?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, we have spoken to all of the major AI companies, many of whom have had their chief executives in Australia as well, either in Sydney or Canberra. We continue to engage. And one of the three categories that I spoke about: the first one is companies making sure they’re in a position to provide appropriate protections. Now, that includes what occurs if AI is able to engage in ways that are not anticipated. Companies need to have in place mechanisms and need to assure the public that those mechanisms are in place. That needs to be reinforced by nation-states taking action, but also there is a need for a discussion about what the global framework is for the roll out of AI, because it is moving very quickly, and we need to make sure that humans remain in control. So it’s a pretty simple philosophy that we have on these matters.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, it’s more than a year since you watched the television show Adolescence, and you encouraged others to do the same. But there’s still a reality that, even though we have the social media ban in place, three and four kids, according to some research, are still accessing social media. So, what is your message to the tech companies about the fact that it’s still possible, within 20 minutes, to get to this misogynistic manosphere content? What is their responsibility here?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, they have an enormous social responsibility, and this is a reform that was led by parents themselves. Adolescence is an incredibly powerful dramatisation of a reality that is all too real for too many parents, where, in that show, for people who haven’t seen it, they’re unaware of their son engaging in the privacy of his room, or in activity that leads him down a very dark road. What Apple have produced, for example, with their new product, is something that has a child feature, but also has a teen feature as well, so that if parents of teens can therefore get access to restricting where – what apps are available, restrictions on what websites are able to be accessed, restrictions on time in which people can be looking on their phones or devices. And this is one of the big things that parents have had in the feedback, is that since our social media ban, parents have reported that their kids are spending more time outside, talking with each other, playing sport, engaging in ways that we want them to. We want children to be able to have their childhood. It’s as simple as that, and that is what parents want to see as well, and that’s what these companies need to recognise. I was very heartened by the work that Apple have done with their R&D, working with paediatricians, working with experts as well, to make sure that their new products provide protections that simply weren’t there before and that will be there in the future.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, on Tuesday night, you may likely run into Prime Minister Takaichi. It will be your first face-to-face since your podcast appearance. Will you be apologising for the comments you made about her gift of balance?
PRIME MINISTER: We have a good relationship, and it will be very positive, the engagement I have with the Prime Minister.
JOURNALIST: I just want to circle back to the meeting with Tim Cook. I know, obviously, we weren’t in the room, but can you give us a sense as to what the discussions were like? And, in particular, I’d like to know more about Tim Cook’s reaction to the digital duty of care, given this is obviously Silicon Valley, that they are in charge of the algorithms.
PRIME MINISTER: Yeah. Well, the digital duty of care is consistent with the position that we have taken over a medium time now with the social media ban. The digital duty of care is about making sure that companies have that social responsibility expressed through legislation, and we continue to engage on it. I think it is very positive legislation. I was able to outline what the legislation is envisaging. We have, of course, an exposure draft of it. You have an exposure draft so that you can get feedback, but it is important that we don’t duck our responsibility, that we don’t simply do.
I find it extraordinary that the opposition have said that they don’t support the digital duty of care. They haven’t seen the legislation yet. All we’ve had is the exposure draft, which is designed to get feedback.
So we’ll continue to advocate, and I’m sure that it will be a centre of discussion this week. This week, the fact that there is such a focus on technology and its impact on the way that society operates says a lot about where we are, and that reflects the concerns of the community as we go forward. Thank you. Thank you very much.
