Ralph Babet (Victoria, United Australia Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.

Leave granted.

I table an explanatory memorandum and seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

Late last year the Parliament passed the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024. This bill was passed via a curbed debate. It was fast-tracked through the Parliament via guillotine along with dozens of other bills.

Since the passage of this bill, much objection has been raised by the general population, tech companies, and human rights advocates.   .   The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 is not fit for purpose and presents substantial risks to human rights, privacy and data security.

This bill is simple in form, but vital in purpose.

It repeals in its entirety one of the most rushed, ill-considered, and intrusive pieces of legislation this Parliament has passed in recent years.

The so-called Social Media Minimum Age Act was sold to Australians as a measure to protect children, which sounds lovely until you realise it does the exact opposite.

In actuality, the Act threatens to harm children, while trampling on the rights and privacy of every other Australian in the process.

To enforce its social media ban, tech platforms will need to verify the age of every social media user.

That means every Australian—from a 12-year-old on Instagram to a 72 year-old on Facebook—would be forced to hand over personal data to tech companies or intermediaries.

We've seen what happens when personal data is stored en masse: it gets breached, leaked, or sold.

The idea that Australians should trust social media giants or bureaucratic contractors with their biometric information is not just naïve, it's reckless.

Worse still, by pushing kids off mainstream platforms, we risk driving them into darker, unregulated online spaces where there's less oversight and more danger.

To save kids from Instagram dances, we'll push them toward encrypted chat rooms.

Let's also remember that the Social Media Minimum Age Act was rammed through Parliament before the Government could confirm how it would be enforced.

The technology doesn't yet exist to make the Government's ban work effectively.

In fact, during recent trials, government-approved age-checking tools mistook 15-year-olds for 37-year-olds. Which, incidentally, makes it the only government program in history to make teenagers feel older.

The proposed safety system threatens to descend into farce.

The Australian Human Rights Commission has made it clear that this blanket ban is the wrong response.

Instead, it recommends a statutory duty of care for social media companies that holds them accountable for the safety of their platforms.

At the same time, why not introduce stronger digital literacy programs in schools and better tools for parents and teachers?

Because here's the key point, parents, not the Government, are responsible for raising their children.

Canberra should support families, not substitute for them.

This legislation also collides headfirst with international human rights obligations.

It threatens freedom of expression, freedom of association, the right to education, to culture and play, to privacy, and to access information. These are rights protected under the ICCPR, the ICESCR, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Elon Musk's X platform has warned that the law is punitive, disproportionate, and likely unlawful under international treaties.

Australia's eSafety Commissioner is responsible for the implementation and enforcement of this ban. Back in 2024, she rebuked the proposed ban comparing it to banning children from the ocean instead of teaching them how to swim. "We do not fence the ocean or keep children entirely out of the water but we do create protected swimming environments that provide safeguards and teach important lessons from a young age" she said.

We all want children to be safe online. But safety cannot come at the cost of freedom, privacy, or common sense.

It must be done lawfully, proportionately, and intelligently.

Education, parental empowerment, and corporate responsibility, rather than coercion, are the real tools of online safety.

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 fails every one of those tests.

That's why this repeal is necessary.

We need to restore privacy, preserve freedom, affirm parental primacy, and return common sense to our digital laws.

I commend the bill to the Senate.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.