Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Digital Economy) | Hansard source

I think it's really important when we have this discussion, that we separate the intent versus the outcome. Now, it's clear the intent is to make sure all those under 16 do not have access to social media. As a father of a 10-year-old and 12-year-old, as someone that visits many schools, I don't want anyone under 16 to be on social media, and that's not in doubt on this side of the house. But intent is one thing, and outcome is the other. An intent without outcome being delivered is irrelevant, and the reality is that this legislation has not worked. Six months later, we are back again because it has not worked. Those opposite ask what has changed from yesterday and the day before when we supported it in the House to now in the Senate. It's the government guillotining debate and refusing to have an inquiry into this legislation. They weren't prepared to look at the detail and understand.

Let's look at history. This legislation was introduced on Monday this week. This government wants to ram it through the house on Thursday. But let's look at December when the first legislation was brought in. The government rushed a committee through that allowed four hours—four hours—of public hearings on the social media ban for under 16s in December last year. They rushed through this process. They would not have debate and engagement to understand that this is a technical decision to get right. They rushed it through in December, and we are back here again, looking to make amendments because the legislation hasn't worked. They are doubling down on making the same mistake.

The coalition is saying, 'Let's take the time to have an inquiry, to do the work, to understand why it has failed and why we can get it right the second time.' As the member for Berowra said, we don't want to be back here in six months' time having to amend it again. The detail was wrong the first time. Let's get it—

A government member: Why not?

Why not? Why don't we get it right the second time? The minister is happy to fly to New York, claim 'Mission accomplished' like former president Bush did, and we have not succeeded. We have not succeeded. I will not take moral lectures from those opposite who think Mark Latham is fit to be leader of the Australian Labor Party. I will not take moral lectures from you all. I understand it's a little bit of a nerve for those opposite. You spend a lot of time rushing legislation through this House for political means, but doing your job is getting the legislation right. This legislation is not working. Young—

A government member: How?

How is it not working? I will explain to you if you stop interjecting and listen. Young children are still on social media. They deactivate their accounts and create new accounts. Your minister failed. Your minister rushed this legislation through the house, and we need to get it right. We need to get this legislation right. It was wrong the first time. Six months later, we are seeing that. There was no proper inquiry into this legislation in December, and this government is refusing to have a second inquiry to try and clean up its own mess. I understand it is a sore point for them. We see time and time again that the backbench has to follow orders. They can't get what they want on gambling reform. They have to take the sandwich from those. They have to follow the Prime Minister's lead on a bad budget, and they have to continue to follow the minister that is failing when it comes to social media. The intent is correct; the outcome is wrong.

And we know that the outcome is wrong because the minister is back here trying to fix up the mess that the minister made. If the minister had got it right the first time, we wouldn't be back here the second time. The real question is this: why is the minister not prepared to actually have some scrutiny of the legislation? The reason is that the minister knows they failed the first time and they have failed again the second time by not doing the process. The reality is, as the member for Berowra said, we don't want to come back and have to do it a third time in six months time or 12 months time. Let's let the experts have their say. Let's get it right so we can protect young Australians.

See this speech in context