Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

The eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, registered the Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code in June this year. The changes are due to take effect from December 2025. The intent of the code, developed under the Online Safety Act 2021, is to protect children from harmful online content like pornography, child abuse material, high-impact violence and self-harm material—for example, those which promote eating disorders and suicide—from being returned in search results. It's intent is also to implement restrictions on AI functionality and associated algorithms integrated with search engines from being used to generate synthetic versions of this type of material.

The code will require search engine providers to implement age verification safety settings, parental controls and crisis prevention measures so that, if a user is not identified or over 18 years of age, any such images will be filtered out from being returned in any search results. Once these changes take effect in December, if a user is not logged into their online account search, their search results will be filtered. These filters are generally guided by AI, and we know that they can get it wrong. Just look at the current Meta debacle, with people's business accounts being blocked and deleted.

Protecting children from harm is of paramount importance. That is not up for debate here. But since the code was registered we have received feedback from Australians who feel that this code, which was registered by the eSafety Commissioner in isolation of any legislative scrutiny or parliamentary oversight, will impinge on their privacy and personal freedoms. Those voices cannot be ignored. And, whilst the intent is to protect young people from harm, it is essential that this be balanced with an individual's right to privacy and protection of personal freedoms.

The coalition has consistently pushed back, and will continue to push back, on legislation that restricts or risks suppressing a right to freedom of speech. However, it is important to note that it is incorrect to suggest that all measures designed to protect children online are merely a Trojan horse for government surveillance of ordinary people's use of the internet. Government can both protect children from the very real risks of online harm and uphold the rights and freedoms of all Australians. It is not a matter of either/or. It can and must do both.

We all remember Labor's disastrous attempts to impose its misinformation bill. We were forced to dump it after a massive public outcry. Not a single senator in this place, other than those from the other side, would support it. It was the coalition which forced the government to make changes to the online safety laws last year to prevent the risk of digital ID being imposed. We make no apologies for holding this government to account to ensure that they do not overreach or go too far.

The eSafety Commissioner's dual role in developing, and regulating and enforcing her own policies is unique, but the concentration of this authority is now raising concerns which may require greater scrutiny—for example, through this parliament. We must ensure—and this must always be the case with legislation and delegated legislation—that the operations of bodies do not stray away from the intent of the parliament when they were first established.

Let's be clear. The eSafety Commissioner is not an elected position. It's decisions do not come before the parliament for us to scrutinise. The remit of the eSafety Commissioner, without adequate safeguards, is getting out of hand, and we must pause to consider this. Ensuring every adult logs into an account to browse the internet is taking the eSafety Commissioner's power to a new level which must be debated and scrutinised further. But we can't lose sight of the fact that we must protect our children from online harm.