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

Senator HENDERSON (Victoria) (19:03): Minister, I do want to object very strongly to the way you've just mischaracterised my concerns. I've been a very outspoken critic of big tech and the way the algorithm, particularly the content-recommendation algorithm on some platforms, is driving harm. I just think it's very important that you don't seek to conflate two different issues that are in the digital duty of care bill.

In relation to the content-recommendation algorithm, we have made it very clear that this needs proper consideration and that we have simply warned that rushing a proposal to mandate non-profiled social media feeds, particularly given the potential consequences for Australian small businesses and other online retailers and ecommerce operators, needs proper consideration.

I hope and trust that that will occur during the Senate inquiry into the digital duty of care bill. There is a legitimate debate about whether Australians should be able to switch algorithmic profiling on and off. So please don't conflate our concerns.

The concerns I have raised in relation to free speech relate to the minister's ability to make regulations defining categories of harm and categories of serious harm by regulation without parliamentary oversight. This is the misinformation and disinformation bill all over again. I have always strongly called for serious online harms to be expressly prohibited, but that is the role of the parliament.

That is not the role of the minister behind closed doors. Many, many Australians do not trust this government, I do not trust this government, and I can assure you that I do not trust the minister and this government to determine what harmful content is in the context of a so-called digital duty of care bill. Let's not forget that, under the tort of negligence, Australian companies are already liable for harm caused that is foreseeable.

There are already some important principles at play that apply to every single company in this country. But, as I say, we are extremely concerned about laws that raise very serious free speech concerns. While serious online harms require serious action, Australians should not have to surrender basic freedoms in the process.

We are concerned about protecting kids, empowering parents, shining a light on big tech and protecting the freedoms that Australians expect. Minister, I might say that, if the government were serious about putting parents first, the government would have acted back in 2022 in relation to the recommendations in the digital platforms inquiry—opening up the operating systems so that parents could access safety tools, like corporations and government departments.

It's profoundly disappointing that there's been no engagement, no interest from the government, in relation to this incredibly important issue. This evidence and these concerns have been raised in various Senate committees for a couple of years. If the government were interested in holding big tech to account, the government would be supporting our amendment in relation to algorithmic transparency.

So we don't need a lecture from you, Minister, in relation to our commitment to kids, to online safety and to parents, when we are bringing forward really meaningful amendments that matter and the government is turning its back on those proposals. The TEMPORARY CHAIR ( Senator Ciccone ): The question before the chair is that the amendments that have been moved by the government, on sheet ST132, be agreed to.

I advise senators that, as a division has been called and it is after 6.30, the division will be deferred. However, we can continue debate on the bill and any subsequent amendments to the extent that other amendments are not in conflict with the amendments on sheet ST132, which have just been debated. I understand there may be an issue with the opposition amendments on sheet 4088, but, if senators wish to make a contribution towards any of the other amendments, I'd be happy to give them the call.

I've been advised by the clerk that sheet 4088 is in conflict with sheet ST132, so it's advisable that we don't go there. Senator HENDERSON: by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 4059: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (table), omit the table, substitute: Commencement information Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Provisions Commencement Date/Details 1. Sections 1 to 3 and anything in this Act not elsewhere covered by this table The day this Act receives the Royal Assent. 2.

Schedule 1, items 1 to 5 The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent. 3. Schedule 1, item 5A 6 months after this Act receives the Royal Assent. 4. Schedule 1, item 6 The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent.

(2) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 8), after item 5, insert: 5A After Part 4A Insert: Part 4B — Algorithmic transparency requirements 63L Application of Part — large age-restricted social media platforms This Part applies to a provider of an age-restricted social media platform in a financial year if the annual turnover (within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001) of the provider during the last financial year is more than $100 million. 63M Public transparency requirements (1) Subject to section 63P, a provider to which this Part applies must make publicly available, free of charge and in a readily accessible form, the information specified in subsection (2).

(2) The following information is specified: (a) for each system used materially to select, rank, recommend, promote, demote or otherwise determine the prevalence or prominence of content, accounts or search results for end-users in Australia of the age-restricted social media platform: (i) the algorithmic logic and decision-making architecture of the system; and (ii) the material factors, inputs and signals relied upon; and (iii) the material parameters, thresholds and weightings applied; and (iv) an explanation of how those factors affect the content presented to end-users; (b) for each automated system used materially to identify, classify, remove, restrict, promote, demote or otherwise moderate content or accounts in relation to end-users in Australia of the age-restricted social media platform: (i) the algorithmic logic and decision-making architecture of the system; and (ii) the material rules, criteria, inputs, parameters, thresholds and weightings applied; and (iii) the circumstances in which content or an account is referred for human moderation; and (iv) the policies and rules governing automated and human moderation and any review or appeal; and (v) information about the accuracy, error rates and material limitations of the system; (c) for each system used to determine, estimate, infer, verify or assure the age of an end-user in Australia of the age-restricted social media platform: (i) the algorithmic logic and decision-making architecture of the system; and (ii) the manner in which the system is implemented; and (iii) the categories of information and data relied upon; and (iv) the material decision rules, parameters and thresholds applied; and (v) the circumstances in which an end-user is referred to another method of age assurance or required to provide additional information; and (vi) information about the accuracy, error rates and material limitations of the system, including false positive and false negative rates where available. 63N Information must be meaningful and current (1) Information published in accordance with section 63M must be sufficiently detailed to permit meaningful independent scrutiny of how the relevant system operates and its effect on Australian end-users.

(2) To avoid doubt, a provider does not comply with section 63M if the provider publishes information that is materially incomplete or misleading, excessively general or otherwise insufficient to support meaningful independent scrutiny. 63P Protection of safety, security and privacy (1) Section 63M does not apply in relation to information to the extent that the publication of the information could reasonably be expected to: (a) be a disclosure of personal information; or (b) materially compromise the safety or security of an end-user or the platform; or (c) materially assist a person to circumvent or defeat systems designed to protect children or prevent cyber attacks, fraud, spam, platform manipulation or other malicious activity.

(2) Section 63M does not apply in relation to information of a kind prescribed by the legislative rules. 63Q Compliance with this Part A provider to which this Part applies must comply with this Part. Civil penalty: 60,000 penalty units.