Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026

Senator GREEN (Queensland—Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia) (11:49): I want to begin by thanking senators who've contributed to the debate on the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026. Of course, I should reflect that it's been a wide-ranging debate, and that is understandable.

This is a public policy area of great interest to all senators. And of course there was a significant announcement yesterday, with the government releasing the digital duty of care exposure draft, so there has been quite a lot of debate going and leaning towards that digital duty of care. I'm going to speak about the bill in front of us and refrain from commenting beyond that and talk a little bit about what this bill does—to put it on the record and talk about why it is important that the Senate pass this bill.

The bill amends the Online Safety Act 2021 to strengthen enforcement for the social media minimum age framework, a framework that was passed by this parliament. I want to thank the committee members who have participated in the committee process. I want to thank all the witnesses and organisations that provided submissions to that process.

The bill provides the eSafety Commissioner with additional powers to strengthen evidence-gathering capability and increase financial penalties that will act as a real deterrent to well-resourced companies. The bill also expands the commissioner's authority to seek information and documents from any person, not just social media platforms, where the commissioner reasonably believes that they hold material relevant to the compliance of the minimum age framework.

This would include third parties, like age-assurance providers. Further, the bill will give the eSafety Commissioner the power to require a person to give evidence and answer questions, providing an extra tool to support robust and effective investigations. This would empower the commissioner to examine decision-makers and executives of age-restricted social platforms.

I believe government amendments have been circulated to that end, and I will seek to move those during the committee stage. These powers are important to understanding what processes platforms have put in place in regard to the social media age obligation to prevent under-16s from holding accounts—a law passed by this parliament that should be enforced. These changes are important, and they are urgent.

There are still too many children on social media, and we know that big tech needs to do more. The penalties that we are seeking in this bill include doubling the maximum civil penalties for noncompliance with the minimum-age obligations, bringing the maximum penalty up to $109.2 million for a body corporate. The bill also doubles the penalties for failure to comply with information-gathering notices from the eSafety Commissioner, with the maximum penalty currently equivalent to $1.82 million for a body corporate.

Finally, the bill will increase the amount payable under infringement notices to one-fifth of the maximum penalty available for all civil penalty provisions in the social media minimum age framework. I understand that political points will be made during this discussion and this debate, but this bill is about ensuring that the eSafety Commissioner is equipped to investigate rich, powerful companies and to make sure it has the tools and the powers to hold them to account for their obligations under our social media minimum-age law.

It signals to social media platforms that they must take their obligations seriously and must comply with the laws passed by this parliament. The previous speaker talked about looking back at this period of history, and I think we will look back on this period of history and we will look at all the work this government is doing to protect children online. And we will find out today, or possibly tomorrow, where the Liberal Party stands on that.

I'm genuine in this—I think that, if, when we look back at this period of time, the Liberal Party was unable to support these amendments and continued to not support this policy going forward, they will have been on the wrong side. On one side, you have tech giants—big tech companies, foreign owned companies—and on that same side is standing One Nation. The One Nation senators in this place have made their position very clear.

And it's really a decision for the Liberal and National parties—whether they will choose again to stand with One Nation or whether they will stand up for this law that was passed by this parliament. The previous speaker also used a term used by a number of Liberal senators: we shouldn't 'parent from Canberra'. The ironic thing about that is that I am literally parenting in Canberra right now, with my small, 4-year-old daughter here in Canberra with me.

It made me reflect on what it would be like to have been a parent standing in the Prime Minister's courtyard yesterday, talking about the loss a child. If anyone in this place or anyone in the community had an opportunity to see that press conference, they would know it was very hard not to be moved by the pleas from parents who, through the News Corp 'Let Them Be Kids' campaign, started campaigning for this type of law a long time ago, which led to the social media ban for under-16s, which is leading to the digital duty of care, and who are also calling for the parliament to pass these powers that give the regulator more power to investigate and to hold big tech to account.

I want to finish on the words of one of those parents. Mr Wayne Holdsworth, who spoke yesterday so very powerfully, also gave evidence to the committee on this bill. I want to read out his words because, really, they're better than any that we could have scripted ourselves.

Any person who would try to put themselves in the place of a parent who's lost a child would know it's impossible. So I want to finish my contribution, before we go on to talk about the amendments that have been proposed, by reading out the words of Mr Holdsworth in relation to this legislation. He said: I don't think that, unless you've gone through what Mia, Emma and I and hundreds of other parents here in Australia have gone through, you really understand what the urgency is about.

We could just go back into our lives and not do anything, but we have chosen this pathway to influence people to make change today. Don't let us down. This will never be perfect; it's not supposed to be perfect, so don't let perfection get in the way of a magnificent idea that Australia started first that will save kids just like Tilly, Ollie and Mac.

Don't wait. Those were the words of Mr Wayne Holdsworth, and I thank him again on behalf of the government and on behalf of the Senate for the advocacy that he has shown in this incredibly important part of public policy. It is incredibly important that we give the regulator the power to enforce, to investigate and to hold big tech to account for laws that were passed by this parliament.

I look forward to talking a little bit more about the amendments that the government is proposing. I commend this bill to the Senate. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Sharma ): The question is that this bill, the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026, be read a second time.