Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

The coalition opposes this motion and is likely to oppose the private senator's bill introduced by Senator Payman, the Online Safety Amendment (Broadening Adult Cyber Abuse Protections) Bill 2026. But I just want to say, having listened to Senator Payman's contribution on this, she presented a very thoughtful and considered speech. I think that what's behind the bill and what you're trying to achieve is notable and definitely worth commending. While I disagree with what it might achieve and how it would achieve it, I do want to seriously commend you, Senator Payman, for the work that you've done.

You raise a very important issue. I've got children, and they're through those very difficult teenage years and are older teenagers now. But I've watched them and their friends deal with the challenges of the online world that, as a 47-year-old, I didn't have to deal with when I was a teenager. Young people these days are dealing with things that obviously generations before them didn't have to deal with. It is important that we tackle this issue. It's important that the government deals with this seriously. It's a global issue and it's something that needs to be dealt with.

This issue of online safety has been recognised by the coalition and indeed also by the Albanese Labor government, which started the Statutory Review of the Online Safety Act in November 2023. But that was 2½ years ago. Ms Rickard was appointed to undertake that work and provide a report to the minister by 31 October 2024, which was done. Ms Rickard's report was extensive, and more than 150 public submissions were received. The report, all 200-plus pages, made 67 recommendations, and, while the report was completed in October 2024, the minister sat on it for nearly six months before tabling it publicly in parliament in February 2025. That was over a year ago. Despite receiving the report over a year ago, the minister's most recent statement notes that the government is 'continuing to carefully consider' its recommendations.

You could be critical of the government for taking so long. You could be critical of the government for sitting on this, for sitting on its hands, and criticism is rightfully due to be put onto the government. But the government is right to carefully consider these matters because matters of freedom of speech are critical to a functioning democratic, civil society. This is a vexed issue. Of course we must protect children and of course we must put in place measures that provide that protection. No-one wants to see children, teenagers, put at risk online, but, if we overreach when it comes to restrictions on speech, then who knows what the consequences could be?

I'm pleased that the government is carefully considering it. They shouldn't use that as an excuse not to take proportionate action that's required, but I urge them to carefully consider these things. If we just run at a million miles an hour into implementing some of the recommendations that were in that report and that would have maybe unintended consequences and a chilling effect on freedom of speech, then the consequences for this country—and indeed we're leaders in the world on this—would be significant. We absolutely need to deal with these things carefully.

But we do need a digital duty of care. The government has called on the public to have their say, but what's happened since? What's the government actually doing? I think it's right that Senator Payman and even Senator Hanson-Young—while I disagree with a lot of what she was saying, there were some elements, which I'll come to in a moment, that I do agree with, particularly when it comes to choice; I absolutely agree—are critical of the government. We want to know what you're actually planning to do and we want to see action. Parents want to see action. Parents want to understand what it is you're actually going to do, and of course freedom lovers want to understand it too, because we know that there is a propensity, particularly with this government, to overreach when it comes to impinging upon our rights and freedom of speech. So we want to make sure that what you're going to do and implement is appropriate and proper.

Children are of course the ones that are most vulnerable to cyberbullying, grooming and other nefarious online abuse. It's not just children though. Adults—particularly vulnerable adults—are susceptible. So it is right that the responsibility is put upon platforms to prevent this online abuse from happening in the first place. Now, while the Minister for Communications is busy attending sporting events and jetting off overseas on promotional tours, Australians at home are still waiting on the Albanese Labor government to take appropriate steps and action.

I want to go to something that Senator Hanson-Young said about choice. I think she's actually right when she says that users of these platforms ought to have choice over what they are fed on their feeds and what information they have that is then shared and used. I think that's right. In fact, I don't just think it; I absolutely agree with that. It should be the domain and right of the individual, of the user. I worry that, if we're giving the choice to the platforms themselves or, dare I say, to government or to the eSafety Commissioner to determine and make the ruling on what information can be shared and spread on people's feeds, that's where we start to go into dangerous territory. But we absolutely should have these platforms enabled to give greater choice and transparency to the individual users. It actually is the epitome of freedom of choice and freedom of speech when we as individuals are empowered to make choices about what our information is used for and what information we receive. Absolutely, it should be the right of parents to have more than a say and put in place the controls that are necessary to prevent information that's being passed on.

The review acknowledged that freedom of speech must be protected in order to preserve online safety. Senator Henderson, my colleague, has called for a full investigation into the eSafety Commissioner after the Federal Court ruled that the regulator exceeded its powers by issuing a takedown notice to X—Twitter. The case Senator Henderson referred involved the children's rights activist Celine Baumgarten, who posted concerns in 2024 about a Melbourne primary school teacher promoting gender ideology. Despite an internal finding that the post did not meet the legal threshold for adult cyberabuse, the eSafety Commissioner sent X a complaint alert resembling a formal removal notice citing the Online Safety Act. Both the Administrative Review Tribunal, the ART, and the full Federal Court found that the commissioner acted out side of her statutory authority, leading to the post being reinstated.

This raises serious concerns about free speech, the misuse of regulatory powers and whether the commissioner attempted to suppress views about gender activism in schools.

Adult cyberabuse is significant and a serious issue, but, if a post does not reach the requisite threshold, what the eSafety Commissioner did was effectively stifling free speech when we know free speech is, as I have already discussed, one of the most important and fundamental rights that we have in this country. If we undermine this, we actually undermine the very fabric of the society that we live in. You only need to look at countries across the world—none more so than what we're seeing on our televisions right now, as I stand here—to see that oppression at its extreme, when it comes to freedoms of speech, where you see a country eroded.

So it is of course of great concern. It's something that the minister needs to answer. The minister needs to answer how often the commissioner has improperly used take-down notices and whether individuals have been properly informed of appeal rights. Importantly, we really should have an answer on what the total cost is to the taxpayer for the legal proceedings.

In conclusion, the government should not just shove this report in the bottom drawer; they should respond in a considered way, absolutely, as I have outlined. The report raises serious concerns around online safety, particularly as it pertains to children and young people. This government needs to be accountable in how it stewards the safety of the next generation. In the same breath, though, we cannot hide censorship behind the mask of safety. The coalition will always seek to protect Australians' freedom of speech, and it's committed to ensuring that the measures implemented by this government do not encroach on this very important and fundamental right.