Australia’s House Passes Misinformation Bill, Opposition Says It ‘Belongs in a Dictatorship’

An Australian flag flies atop Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, on Feb. 8, 2024. Melanie Sun/The Epoch Times

Australia’s lower house of Parliament has passed controversial legislation to combat misinformation and disinformation online.

Debate in the House of Representatives started on U.S. election day, and continued on Nov. 7 as the parliament enters its final weeks before Christmas.

The proposed law gives Australia’s media watchdog the power to fine social media companies for online content that is verifiably false, misleading, deceptive, or causes serious harm.

The legislation defines (pdf) serious harm as “harm to public health, to the integrity of an Australian electoral process, vilification of a group in Australian society, imminent harm to the Australian economy, imminent damage to critical infrastructure, disruption of emergency services, and intentionally inflicted physical industry.”

The Coalition, along with independents Russell Broadbent, Andrew Wilkie, Andrew Gee, Helen Haines, “teal” Allegra Spender, and Centre Alliance parliamentarian Rebekha Sharkie, opposed the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 (pdf).

Meanwhile, “teals” Kate Chaney, Zoe Daniel, Monique Ryan, Sophie Scamps, Zali Steggall, and Kylea Tink all supported the Bill.

Concerns Law Could be Weaponised in Federal Election

Critics, including Liberal Shadow Assistant Minister James Stevens, have raised concerns about the timing of the legislation, introduced shortly before a Federal election.

Stevens fears it could be used to silence political opponents before the next election.

“There are rumours that this parliament might not meet again after the November sittings, and I have significant concerns that the reason this is being raced through the chamber now is to get it to the Senate for this legislation to be in place before the next federal election,” Stevens said.

Stevens argued the legislation belongs in a “dictatorship,” describing it as the worst he had ever seen in his six years in Parliament.

“‘Misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ are the sorts of labels you expect to read about in fictitious novels about big government controlling the citizenry,” he added.

“That is deeply concerning, even if the High Court strikes this sort of legislation down.”

Meanwhile, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship Dan Tehan voiced concerns about the unequal treatment, questioning why mainstream media would be exempt from the label of “misinformation” while independent or alternative voices would be impacted.

“If something appears in professional news content, effectively mainstream media, it cannot be misinformation. But, if the same view or a contrary view were put outside of professional news content, it could be misinformation,” he said.

“Who makes the decision as to whether or not it is misinformation or disinformation? That is the real question that needs to be answered.”

Communications Minister Defends Legislation

However, Minister for Communications Michelle Rowland said misinformation and disinformation pose a “significant threat” to the safety and well-being of Australians, along with Australia’s democracy, society, and economy.

“This Bill will increase the transparency and accountability of the actions of digital platforms in relation to seriously harmful misinformation and disinformation, while balancing the freedom of expression that is at the very core of our democracy,” she said.

Rowland added that scrutiny of the Bill is ongoing, noting that these amendments are crucial for holding digital platforms accountable.

“These amendments will keep Australians safe online, because keeping Australians safe is the first duty of all of us in this place,” she said.

Labor MP Graham Perrett echoed these sentiments, highlighting that the reforms aim to protect Australians from the scourges of misinformation while respecting freedom of expression.

He said the legislation would empower the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to hold digital platforms accountable for spreading false or misleading information.

“I’ve said before that the Labor government takes the job of protecting Australians very seriously, and this legislation is another piece of that puzzle,” he said.

Perrett also explained the ACMA would be able to increase transparency about the measures digital platforms have in place and assess their systems and processes.

“This does not mean that digital platforms will subsequently be censoring a wide range of content shared by Australians,” he said.

“The framework is proportionate and graduated and does not restrict freedom of expression.

“Importantly it will be the digital platforms which carry the responsibility for the information they publish and promote.”

The legislation must now be considered in the Senate before it can become law.