29 April 2024

Interview with Mark Gibson, ABC Perth

Note

Subject: annual Targeting Scams report

MARK GIBSON:

The Assistant Federal Treasurer, Stephen Jones is on the line. He's been listening to that, I'm sure. Good morning to you.

STEPHEN JONES:

Good morning. Good to be with you.

GIBSON:

What's your response? When you hear those sorts of stories, you just know, don't you, that this just impacts so many people.

JONES:

Look, we talked about $2.7 billion worth of losses in 2023, but behind every one of those dollars is a personal tragedy and it takes with it, you know, lots of mental health and other anguish that goes with the loss. And too often than not, people feel shame and they feel like they've been mugs and they feel like they've been, you know, done something stupid. And I think the message to your listeners is that these guys, these scammers, they're smart. They're more likely to have a university degree than a prison record, and they know who they're going after and they're using sophisticated technology and techniques to assist them in their ploy. So, we've got to be smart in response. For too long, governments have just said, 'Oh, well, if you get scammed, you're a mug and you're on your own'. And we don't believe that. I think there's a lot can be done, a lot can be done.

GIBSON:

Absolutely, and it's no coincidence, is it? In this latest report, in the latest figures, the over 65s was the age group that lost the most money.

JONES:

Yeah, that's right. So, overall, losses have come down, they've come down about 13 per cent, but they're persistently high for the over 65s. The scam – the reason they're losing more money is they've got more money, by the way. They're more likely to have superannuation or they're more likely to have paid off their house and saved all their life and a little bit of money left aside, and the scammers know this, that's why they target them. And that's why we've got to have strategies in place which are both educating those groups, but also putting in place the interruption strategies that are working in other areas. We've got to do more in that area, particularly for the over 65s. And investment scams, they're about 50 per cent of all the losses. So, we know where we've got to target our efforts and that's exactly what we're doing. Phase one has been implemented – standing up the National Anti‑Scam Centre, the call blocking and the SMS filtering that we're doing, it's having a result. And the work that some of the banks are doing is having a result, but we've got to put in place new codes of practice which will lift the standard right across the economy.

GIBSON:

Yeah, you're talking about mandatory codes. So, will mandatory reimbursement of scam victims by banks and telcos and social media companies be a part of that code?

JONES:

Yeah, look, the problem we've got at the moment is it's a little bit – all the obligations are vague and when liability kicks in, is vague. So, my objective is not starting at the point of compensation, it's actually starting at the point of lifting the standards right across the economy, starting with banks, telcos and social media companies and saying, these are the protections that you must have in place. So, Sue talked about invoice interception scams. One of the things that will help prevent those is having what we call confirmation of payees or verification of bank account number. So, when you type in the number, a name will pop up when you're doing it online with your bank, and you can be assured that the person you are sending the money to is actually the bank account that you intend to. So, that'll be a part of the code of practice. Some banks are doing it voluntarily at the moment. I want to have it implemented right across the board to deal with those sorts of things. Social media companies, best technology in the world. They're not doing nearly enough. They should be doing more to identify and pull down the fake advertising that's going on on their platforms. They're making money out of it and victims are losing money out of it, and that's all wrong. So, compensation should apply. If these guys are promoting scams on their platform, they're making money out of it, they're not meeting their obligations, then compensation should apply in those instances as well. So, if I could just summarise – getting the standard in place. If the standard's breached, then compensation and penalties should apply.

GIBSON:

This is the Federal Assistant Treasurer, Stephen Jones on 720 ABC Radio Perth. I just wonder your view on the banks. We like to bash them and we've said for years they weren't doing enough. They seem to have made some improvements, though. I guess it's twofold, isn't it, in trying to prevent these scams in the first place, but then doing something about it if it happens.

JONES:

Yes, prevention is obviously better than having to, you know, try and recover money or go to compensation once the money has been lost. So, banks have lifted their game. Not all of them. Some of them are doing a good job, some of them are still way below par, but right across the board, I welcome the fact they've put in place a voluntary accord. They will be brought into a mandatory code later this year, and that will lift the standard. Some people say, well, why don't we just make banks always liable if somebody loses money? I don't think that's the best policy approach. I think quite apart from the fact that there are other people at play here – social media companies are hardly small businesses. They're some of the biggest and most profitable companies in the world, and they're often the ones who are publishing these scams, so, they've got a role to play in all of this as well. So, I think the best results will be if we lift the bar right across all of those key players within the economy, starting with banks, social media, telecommunications companies, and then expanding to other areas where scams will move. We know that if we just firm things up in one area, the scammers will move to another. So, we've got to lift protections all across the board. Banks can do more. But I think a simplistic approach of just saying, 'Oh, well, if any loss, if anyone incurs a loss, then the bank always pay', won't work. It'll just make Australia a honey pot for these international crime gangs, because they'll say, well, 'Let's, you know, focus all of our activity on Australia because it's a victimless crime if banks always pay'. And I just don't think that's the right approach.

GIBSON:

No, absolutely. Thanks for your time this morning, appreciate it.

JONES:

Good on you.