Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for that. I’m pleased that there’s a precedent and that you’re aware of it. Coming back to the emergency call provisions and ACMA: it seems to me, from our session with ACMA this morning, that they’re reluctant to get involved. What are the steps? Does your department or does the minister notify ACMA? Does ACMA then follow suit?
Mr Chisholm: It can happen in a couple of ways. This is where the broader piece of work being done on triple 0 and the outcomes of the review from the Optus outage are quite relevant. I might ask Ms Silleri to talk about what ACMA and the government are doing on that front.
Ms Silleri: As you heard this morning, the ACMA has responsibility for the emergency call services determination, which broadly sets out the rules and arrangements to ensure that when you call triple 0 you get through. When we looked at the ecosystem that supports triple 0, as a result of the Optus outage, we found that there were a number of gaps and flaws in that ecosystem, whether that be through formal arrangements, informal arrangements, processes or the actual rules. Many of the recommendations from that review, of which there are 18 in total, are aimed at improving the rules around the ecosystem and particularly the emergency call services determination.
In the government response to the review, the minister indicated she would be directing the ACMA to review the emergency call services determination. I can advise that we’re currently consulting on a draft of that direction. Not only does it look at issues identified in the Optus outage; it’s also looking at issues we’ve learnt through this 3G closure process.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s very refreshing to hear, and reassuring.
Ms Silleri: One of the things we’re most concerned about is: if it’s considered that the rules in the determination do not require that all calls to triple 0 be carried, then they should. That’s where we’re heading.
Senator ROBERTS: So you’re updating literally in real time, from yesterday and today—
Ms Silleri: The minister will direct the ACMA in a very short period of time, and then the ACMA will conduct that work.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Europeans seem to be only just now waiting. I’ve referenced James Parker’s submission and his testimony yesterday many, many times in this hearing; it has been quite a revelation. It seems to me that France is deferring until late this decade—to 2028, I think. Britain continues to use 2G and 3G, as do other countries like South Africa. They seem to be waiting, so we’re in good company—so it’s not as though you’ve dropped the ball.
I was going to focus on who knew what when, but I think Senator Sterle and Senator Canavan have asked those questions. What have you or your staff learnt from that, Mr Chisholm? One of the things that has happened is that TPG have already bolted; they’ve flown the coup, and that’s very disappointing to hear and read. I understand that TPG has a relationship with Optus which enables it to get access to 3G anyway, so they haven’t really bolted. But I don’t want to see Telstra and Optus bolt.
Mr Chisholm: You’re right, in the sense that TPG transitioned earlier this year, January, and they have the capability of their triple 0 calls camping-on to Optus and Telstra. So the potential impact associated with a switch from 3G for triple 0 isn’t really being experienced in the case of TPG because of that link.
Senator ROBERTS: Exactly.
Mr Chisholm: Optus and Telstra are engaging quite extensively with TPG, and TPG with Optus and Telstra, to ensure that those customers are identified and are supported in advance of any transition. But you are correct that the potential impact of that has been muted because of the camping-on capabilities that exist there.
Senator ROBERTS: What actions have you implemented? You convened a meeting, I think, with the industry earlier this year, February, which seems to me horribly late, but I think the industry has been keeping you out of the loop somehow.
Ms La Rance: Can we just add that we have had quarterly reporting from industry from around 2021. We requested, due to some of the issues that we saw coming through that reporting late last year, much more granular reporting. That reporting has been useful, and, in something similar, you might seek the granular reporting earlier. We also have the work that is already underway through the Bean review, which will address some of the risks that we’ve seen coming through the 3G shutdown as well. That’s already underway, as Ms Silleri has outlined.
Mr Chisholm: The thing that I’ve been looking at here is the point that was made earlier that there was this strong focus for some time, stretching back to 2021, on the reporting and service equivalence. It was really only late last year that the question of a proportion of devices not able to make emergency services calls was being raised. This is despite the fact that we were getting very regular—at some point, quarterly—reporting, which is now, obviously, much more intensive reporting, from industry. Then, in December last year, Telstra, in its quarterly report, indicated that there were some devices—older handsets—that were potentially impacted and that Telstra, Optus and TPG were working together to look at that. Then, early this year, following on from that, we undertook a range of our own analysis and wrote out to the companies, and the minister commissioned the working group and a number of the reporting mechanisms that sit under that. We obviously do depend on industry giving us the information that we need to advise government and to communicate with the community about the impacts of these changes, and it’s fair to say that, as soon as we started to get a sense that there were devices that were going to be impacted that weren’t previously identified, we did ramp up our engagement and put in place more regular reporting. The minister has now written on a number of occasions to industry and met with the companies to seek updates from them. As I say, she is aware of regulatory options that are available to her.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for that. That’s very encouraging and reassuring. I think Ms La Rance said that reporting started under the Morrison government—quarterly reporting from April 2021. It was initially just Telstra, when Telstra was asked, and it was specifically about 3G shutdown and 4G coverage. Then, in May 2023, you added Optus to the party—your department did.
Ms La Rance: Minister Rowland requested quarterly reporting from Optus.
Mr Chisholm: Minister Rowland’s, yes.
Senator ROBERTS: So, rather than be embarrassed by your lack of action, you’ve actually taken action to ramp it up when you started becoming concerned?
Mr Chisholm: Correct.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you.
Ms La Rance: I think quantifying it was an important part of that.
Senator ROBERTS: Exactly, the data. Wonderful.
Ms La Rance: We became aware of the scale. As the mobile network operators gave as evidence this morning, they also became aware of the scale around that time with the corrective questions. We took that to the minister when we got it in late February this year. The minister acted quite quickly, along with us, to establish that working group and that fortnightly reporting, which has the information that we’ve discussed today on the different device types and numbers.
Senator ROBERTS: Perhaps jumping the gun a bit here: if you defer or intervene then perhaps there could be an objective threshold criteria which has been met by the telcos specified by your department or by the minister to say that, when you achieve this level of surety or this level of conversion, so that there are no people left behind when 3G shuts down, then, and only then, will they shut it down. Or maybe this is such a mammoth exercise, looking at the number of devices, that you make an indefinite extension.
Mr Chisholm: That very much goes to that question of obtaining assurance that, particularly when it comes to handsets, triple 0 calls will be able to be made. That has been our fundamental concern in relation to devices: the switch will happen when it happens, and people will still be able to make phone calls on some of those devices, but triple 0 calls won’t work. That is not acceptable for the government.
Senator ROBERTS: No, and it will be interesting to know if you can give us, one day, a deadline by when we will know that every lift and every airport is okay. Until then, I don’t think we can afford to shut it down. As I said, we’re in good company. We’ve got some leading operators in Europe now recognising that the core issue here is an industry failure to address the root cause, which is serious 4G compatibility issues and still relying upon 3G. I thought this whole exercise was about just about regional access, safety, productivity and the environment, but I have learned, just in the space of 48 hours, that it’s a hell of a lot more and much more serious. It raises questions, including of the minister and the department. It seems like you’ve got that covered. Now we will have to be watching what the minister does in the future to protect Australians.
Ms La Rance: We will provide the list of critical industry peak bodies that we’ve contacted. I will add that this list isn’t exhaustive.
Senator ROBERTS: When did you contact them?
Ms La Rance: We have contacted them—we would have to check the timeframe—over the last 12 months.
Senator ROBERTS: So it is not just since you became concerned?
Ms La Rance: No.
Senator ROBERTS: I noted here that in February this year you started getting more detailed numbers, and that coincides with your first elevated meeting.
Ms La Rance: Yes. February this year was that breadth and that particular focus on that triple 0 issue.
Mr Chisholm: To give you a sense of it: we have been very broad. This list includes water and sewage services, energy companies, health care and hospitals, universities, and food and groceries. We’ve talked about transport, infrastructure companies, defence, transport and space technology. We have gone very broadly, in terms of sectors that we’ve reached out to, and we’ll continue to do that work as part of the information we need to gather for advising the minister.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s good news. One of the things I’ve done is go through the submissions and the witness statements. I went through, in particular, Mr Parker’s submissions and his summary statements. I came up with five sets of questions. The fourth one was his belief that there has been insufficient oversight from the minister, the department, ACCC, ACMA and media, but I can see now that it hasn’t been insufficient. You are ramping it up, which is good to see. I have more questions, but the final thing we need to see from your department or the minister is a quantified threshold to say that when that’s reached, only then can you move on and shut 3G and, even better, as part of that threshold, a specification that they will sort out the 4G compatibility issue. That seems to be the core problem. The rest is smoke and mirrors, not on your part, but on the industry’s part—they’re playing footloose here.
Ms La Rance: Through that working group there has been a lot of work undertaken to understand the different devices and share that information, and we will continue to work with ACMA on those device standards as well.
Senator ROBERTS: On the compatibility issues?
Ms La Rance: Yes, the standards for devices being able to operate, and that goes to the triple 0 issue in particular.
Senator ROBERTS: I understand there’s GSMA and GSM, which provide advice or hints rather than hard standards globally, and the European countries are now starting to wake up to the fact they’re not in compliance with them. It seems as though the same applies here.
Ms La Rance: We’re aware of Mr Parker’s submission and we’ve gone through that. We’ll make sure that the relevant issues will be raised.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m sorry. What was that last sentence?
Ms La Rance: We’ll make sure that, if there are issues in there that are relevant, they will be raised. There’s already an awareness of most of them.
Senator ROBERTS: You are already aware. So there’s hope that not only will 3G continue until it’s safe to do so but that the compatibility issue, the core issue, will also be addressed by your department, or make sure that the industry addresses it.
Ms La Rance: It’s under consideration to see what there is to be addressed. Some of the issues that have been raised are in progress, or some of the characterisation by Mr Parker is a little bit different, but we will work with ACMA on that.
Senator ROBERTS: Who is ultimately responsible if it proceeds and is a commercial disaster or people’s lives are threatened or even deaths occur because of failures? Is the department, the minister, the telcos, or all of the above, responsible?
Mr Chisholm: At the end of the day, the companies have responsibilities to their customers associated with that switch. So that’s one set of responsibilities. Industries themselves that represent organisations or individuals with devices who are aware of the transition have a responsibility to ensure that that communication effort is being amplified and undertaken. And the government—
Senator ROBERTS: Let me just check my understanding. You’re saying that the telcos are responsible and you are responsible for making sure they’re responsible.
Mr Chisholm: The role we have taken is twofold—I guess it’s threefold. One is to get to the bottom of the information like how many numbers of devices are affected, where are those devices—
Senator ROBERTS: With due respect, also the compatibility issues, the core issue.
Mr Chisholm: Absolutely. That’s something that’s very relevant. That’s one part of what we do. The other part of what we do is to amplify and ensure that people are aware of this. We have seen the—
Senator ROBERTS: Which people? Do you mean the customers?
Mr Chisholm: The customers. Some of the industries we’ve talked about here this morning, as part of the reaching out effort and talking to these industries, there have been times when we’ve found that they are well aware of it; there are other times we have found they are less aware of it. We see our job as bringing that information to the broader set of information or broader set of groups as possible. Thirdly—and this comes to your question—at the end of the day, we provide advice back to government about all of those issues and the potential recourse available under legislation to respond to that issue.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s not sufficient to say, ‘We’re going to switch over in two months, six months, 12 months, two years.’ That doesn’t cut it. A lot of people think, ‘Well, I’ve got my latest phone, it’s 5G,’ and they think that’s sweet, but they don’t know about the embedded devices all through their businesses, hundreds of the darn things, or the lifts in the airport.
I think that’s the critical step that the telcos have failed on, because that has come through loud and clear, be it from the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman this morning or from other groups. A lot of people don’t know that they’re exposed here, and they’re relying upon you to protect them. I think that’s another part.
Perhaps I could go to something else to see if you’re aware of it. Mr Parker—and I’m pleased to see that you’re going to be reading his paper in detail—
Ms La Rance: We already have.
Senator ROBERTS: You already have? That’s good. I’m trying to advertise it because I was seriously impressed by it. He deserves a medal. In one of the summaries from his two-page summary he says that the industry is sacrificing public interest for commercial interest. I’m not accusing the telcos of being corrupt; I think they’re probably swept up in the groupthink. He says specifically that more handset sales, more telco sales and more revenue for associated industry are all very alluring. Under the circumstances, people can get swept along and think that it’s all hunky-dory, when they don’t really look. And I’m pleased to see that you are looking.
He also mentioned that the industry could likely be suffering from a shortfall on ‘recouping their 5G investment’ and that they’re looking to spur along 5G sales. In other words, it’s more commercially beneficial, as he says, to sell people new phones than provide updates to existing devices. But the key is the updates to existing devices. So I think that we’ve got an industry sacrificing safety and customers instead of fixing the standardisation issues at the moment.
Mr Chisholm: I would be reluctant to express an opinion about the broader investment and commercial considerations that might be relevant to the telecommunications companies’ considerations. There are a whole set of issues there that are probably best directed to them. I’m aware of the points you’ve raised there. I would come back to what our fundamental focus is: irrespective of the motivations of the transition, it must address the concerns and considerations that we’ve outlined here today about public safety and about ensuring that we don’t have any of the risks realised that we’ve talked about.
Ms La Rance: That has very much been the focus of that working group, and the three mobile network operators have been participating in all of those working group meetings and outlining what they’re doing to contact affected consumers and industry groups.
Senator ROBERTS: I think that there is consumer protection—that’s officially ACCC’s role—but surely, as part of your oversight of the telcos, that’s part of your role as well.
Mr Chisholm: We have been communicating with regulators as well, ACMA and the ACCC, and we’re providing advice to the minister. But one of the key roles of government in any of these industry transition issues, particularly where you’ve got this question of potential safety impacts, is to reach as many people as we possibly can.
Senator ROBERTS: Not only reach them but make sure they understand.
Mr Chisholm: Absolutely—reach them and make sure they understand. And if there’s a view that some of those technical issues you’ve outlined haven’t been properly addressed, or if we can’t be confident that they’ll be addressed, that will certainly be relevant to our advice back to government.
Senator ROBERTS: I think that we need to see a position where the telcos can guarantee that every trucker with a 3G tracker has been contacted; that, for every piece of farm equipment, as Senator Canavan said, every holder has been contacted; and that every lift in every airport will work. I also understand that, in relation to the emergency calls determination, ACMA testified that a certain network, such as 3G, not being available to make emergency calls would not breach the rules. Is that the case?
Mr Chisholm: There’s a requirement under the rules to ensure that triple 0 calls are able to be made. It doesn’t focus on whether it’s 3G or 4G; however, our focus is on ensuring that triple 0 calls can be made as part of the transition anyway.
Ms Silleri: The ACMA has a certain interpretation of the existing determination, which is why the minister is currently considering a review of the direction to them to make it beyond doubt that calls must be carried to triple 0. If I could just add something on one of the issues that you touched on around device compatibility, an additional recommendation arising from the Optus outage review—I think it’s recommendation 3—is that there must be mandated six-monthly testing across devices and networks for end-to-end interoperability to ensure that a call can be carried from one network to another, regardless of the device. That testing requirement is currently being developed by the industry association Communications Alliance under request from the ACMA. So that’s a further measure that will ensure that, going forward, handsets and networks will be configured in a way that calls will be carried to triple 0.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for that. My staff have just been through the proceedings from today and have been getting some of the details. As I said, with more than a million devices not being compatible after 3G is removed, maybe they meant that some networks will still rely on 3G.
One of the things that surprised me today—well, maybe it didn’t surprise me—was that the Optus representative—Mr Pickard, I think it was—said that Optus was not aware of the size of the impact until 24 February. How is it that a company the size of Optus, with the customer reach it’s got and the responsibility it’s got, can make a decision to shut down and then not be aware until a few months before the deadline? That’s really chilling.
Ms La Rance: I understand that that was in relation to quantifying the triple 0 devices that appeared to work but wouldn’t. That came to light for industry in the second half of last year. That was the process that I’ve gone through a couple of times with quantifying it. So industry—
Senator ROBERTS: So you’re saying it’s to their credit that they’ve opened up and found it?
Ms La Rance: Once they were aware of the problem to then understand how many people were affected—that is an issue, the triple 0 issue, that came to light last year.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s pretty embarrassing.
ACTING CHAIR: We are running short of time, so, Senator Roberts, do you have any more?
Senator ROBERTS: That’s it from me.