Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 2
PROTECTED CABINET
MS24-001787
To: The Hon Michelle Rowland MP, Minister for Communications (for decision)
Subject: Social Media Age Limits Legislation – Seeking Prime Ministerial Exemption for Impact
Analysis
Critical Date: Please action by
Friday 27 September to allow the department to progress the
drafting instructions for the Social Media Age Limits legislation.
Communications
Recommendations:
1. That you
agree to seek an exemption from the Prime Minister from undertaking an
Impact
for
Analysis for the forthcoming legislation to enforce a minimum age for access to social
media, for the reasons outlined in this brief.
Agreed / Not Agreed
2. That you
sign the letter to the Prime Minister at
Attachment A, seeking an exemption
Minister
from undertaking the Impact Analysis.
the
Signed / Not Signed
by
1982
Act
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
Date:
Comments:
FOI
the
Key Points:
under
1.
We are seeking your agreement to request an exemption from the Prime Minister from
completing an Impact Analysis for the proposed legislation to enforce a minimum age for access
to social media.
2.
The Prime Minister can exempt a government entity from the need to complete Impact
Analysis in very limited circumstances, including truly urgent and unforeseen events requiring a
Released
decision before adequate Impact Analysis can be undertaken.
3.
We consider the introduction of this legislation to be truly urgent as an immediate,
nationally consistent approach is required to address the harms arising from children’s use of
social media.
PROTECTED CABINET
1
Document 2
PROTECTED CABINET
MS24-001787
4.
Without Commonwealth legislation, there is a real risk that several states will implement
social media bans with different age limits, definitions of social media and regulatory approaches.
A scattered approach would fail to deliver the unified solution Australian parents want, have
potential gaps, and present comparatively higher regulatory burden for platforms, complicating
the implementation of any limits.
5.
In drafting this legislation, the department has considered the impacts identified through
targeted stakeholder engagement, including with youth, parents and child-development experts,
academics and community organisation, engagement with state and territory governments and
ongoing consultation across government through the Cross-Government Working Group on Age
Assurance and officials from the Online Harms Ministers Meeting portfolio departments.
s47C
Communications
7.
While Prime Minister’s exemptions are uncommon, 2 of the last 6 exemptions were granted
for
for legislation related to protecting Australians on social media and online services. There is
precedent that protecting Australians from online harms requires urgent decision making.
8.
The Prime Minister’s decision to grant an exemption will be noted on the OIA website,
including your letter requesting an exemption, and it must be noted in the Explanatory
Minister
Memorandum for the Social Media Age Limit legislation. A Post-Implementation Review must
be completed within 2 years of implementation of the decision.
the
Background
by
9.
The OIA administers the Policy Impact Analysis Framework for the Australian
Government. The OIA does not have any power over decisions and its role is advisory.
10.
Impact Analysis is required for all policy proposals of Government that would be expected
1982
to drive a change in behaviour such as changes to rights, powers, obligations or responsibilities
where those changes would have major impacts on our community.
Act
s34(3)
FOI
Financial impacts: N/A
Legal/Legislative impacts:
the
12.
No additional impact. The Explatonary Memorandum will include a section on impact
analysis, or the exemption from it.
Stakeholder Implications:
under
13.
There are no direct stakeholder impacts from this decision, however it will be publicly
noted that the Prime Minister provided an Impact Analysis exemption for this legislation.
Platforms may point to this in contesting the legislation.
Consultation: The Office of Impact Analysis
Media Opportunities: N/A
Released
Attachments:
Attachment A: Letter to the Prime Minister seeking Impact Analysis Exemption
PROTECTED CABINET
2
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED CABINET
Document 2 Attachment A
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
Minister for Communications
Federal Member for Greenway
MS24-001787
The Hon. Anthony Albanese MP
Prime Minister
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
x.xxxxxxxx.xx@xxx.xxx.xx
Communications
for
Dear Prime Minister
Consistent with your announcement of 10 September 2024, and in response to widespread
community concern around harmful online environments and the growing evidence base
Minister
regarding its detrimental impact on childhood development, the Australian Government is
taking decisive action to enact a minimum age for access to social media by introducing
the
legislation before the end of this year.
by
Australian parents, carers, and children are facing unprecedented challenges in dealing with
a global social issue, and the physical safety and mental health of young people is paramount.
1982
I seek your approval for an exemption from completing an Impact Analysis for the proposed
legislative measures to ensure that the legislation can be introduced this year. This exemption
Act
is consistent with the Office of Impact Analysis’ (OIA) Guidance on OIA Procedures.
FOI
A number of state governments have announced plans to introduce similar measures in the
absence of federal legislation. However, a Commonwealth-led approach will ensure
Australian children are better protected from online harms, and that parents, carers and children
the
are supported in a nationally consistent manner across jurisdictions.
It will also provide certainty to industry and ensure that enforcement powers can be vested to
under
the eSafety Commissioner, the independent regulator for online safety under the
Online Safety
Act 2021.
In drafting this legislation, I have considered the impacts identified through targeted
stakeholder engagement, including with youth, parents and child-development experts,
academics and community organisation, engagement with state and territory governments and
Released
ongoing consultation across government through the Cross-Government Working Group on
Age Assurance and the Online Harms Ministers Meeting.
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
PO Box 6022, Parliament House Canberra
Suite 101C, 130 Main Street, Blacktown NSW 2148 | (02) 9671 4780
PROTECTED CABINET
Document 2 Attachment A
PROTECTED CABINET
A Post-Implementation Review of the decision will be completed within 2 years of
implementing the measures consistent with the OIA requirements for an exemption. Any
unforeseen impacts of the legislation will be assessed at this review point.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Yours sincerely
Michelle Rowland MP
Communications
/ /2024
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED CABINET
PROTECTED: CABINET
Document 3
Meeting/Event Brief
MB24-000682
To: Michelle Rowland
MEETING: Online Harms Ministers Meeting
Timing: 3-4pm,
Tuesday 1 October 2024
Venue: Parliament House, Canberra
Meeting with: You are chairing the Online Harms Ministers Meeting (OHMM). A list of
attendees is included with the OHMM Agenda (
Attachment A).
Communications
Prior meetings: The first OHMM was held on 19 October 2023 and the second meeting on
4 March 2024. The OHMM meets bi-annually, but can meet more regularly as needed.
for
Our Proposed Objectives:
On 19 September, your office advised that discussion at the OHMM scheduled for 1 October 2024
should focus solely on age limits for access to social media. This followed the Prime Minister’s
announcement on 10 September that the Government would introduce legislation to enforce a
Minister
minimum age limit for social media. The OHMM will be an opportunity to discuss the
implications of this policy on other portfolios and consider strategies to support its
the
implementation.
by
Their Objective:
The meeting provides an opportunity for Ministers to share their views on age limits.
Key Points:
1982
1. On your office’s request, this OHMM will focus solely on social media age limits.
Act
The purpose of the OHMM is to coordinate online harms policy and share information
across portfolios. The discussion at the OHMM will be insightful for work underway on
social media age limits and will help to inform the subsequent Cabinet submission.
FOI
2. Mr Jim Betts, Secretary of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development, Communications and the Arts will facilitate the meeting.
the
3. The Annotated Agenda (
Attachment B) includes talking points and background to assist
you to Chair the meeting and lead discussion on social media age limits. The Secretary
will facilitate this discussion. Ministers have been provided with a paper (
Attachment E)
under
ahead of the meeting, to support the discussion.
4. s22(1)(a)(ii)
Released
5. The department has advised the Working Group members of the change in agenda and
asked agencies to brief their ministers on any evidence supporting a particular minimum
PROTECTED: CABINET
1
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 3 Attachment A
PROTECTED: CABINET
Science; the Hon Jason Clare MP, Minister for Education; the Hon Dr Anne Aly MP, Minister for Early
Childhood Education, Minister for Youth.
Agenda
Agenda item
Presenter
Duration
1.
Welcome
Chair, The Hon
5 minutes
Michelle Rowland MP,
Minister for
Communications
2.
Discussion: Social media age limits for children
Chair, The Hon
50 minutes
Minister Rowland will provide an update on the
Michelle Rowland MP,
Government’s recent announcement to introduce
Minister for
legislation to enforce a minimum age for access to social
Communications
media. Ministers will be invited to discuss, including
Communications
sharing evidence-based suggestions of an appropriate
Supported by all
age and suggesting complementary measures to support
for
Ministers
youth, parents and carers, and vulnerable cohorts
6.
Other business and concluding remarks
Chair, The Hon
5 minutes
Michelle Rowland MP,
Minister for
Minister
Communications
the
Close
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED: CABINET
Meeting Agenda
Page 2 of 2
Document 3 Attachment B
PROTECTED: CABINET
Briefing
Online Harms Ministers Meeting
Annotated Agenda
Communications
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
for
Minister for Communications
Minister
1 October 2024
the
by
3 – 4pm
Parliament House
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
1
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Approach to the Online Harms Ministers Meeting (OHMM)
The first Online Harms Ministers Meeting (OHMM) was held on 19 October 2023 and the second meeting on
4 March 2024. The second meeting was facilitated by the then Deputy Secretary, Richard Windeyer. You
requested the department facilitate the OHMM, so the meeting can be a free-flowing discussion among
Ministers.
The OHMM is an opportunity to identify areas for cooperation across relevant portfolios, ensuring alignment
of resources and educational, awareness-raising, research and prevention activities.
The OHMM was established following the House of Representatives Select Committee on Social Media and
Online Safety Inquiry. In the Government’s response to the Committee’s report, tabled in March 2023, the
Government committed to hold a bi-annual meeting of Ministers with responsibility for addressing online
Communications
harms.
for
The OHMM is intended to assist in the development of a streamlined and cohesive approach to online harms
policy in Australia. It complements the work of other forums such as the Digital Platform Regulators Forum,
the Data and Digital Ministers Meeting and the Women and Women's Safety Ministerial Council.
Minister
Attachments
the
• Agenda and attendee list
by
• Draft outcomes from March 2024 OHMM
• OHMM Terms of Reference update
• Age limits paper
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
2
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Facilitator’s Talking Points
• Thank you Minister. It’s a pleasure to be here today to facilitate the third Online Harms Ministers
Meeting.
• As you’re aware, today we are focusing on one item – age limits for children on social media.
• There’s a lot to discuss on this topic but before we move to the discussion item, is there anything that
members would like to raise?
s22(1)(a)(ii)
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
4
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Item 2: Discussion: Social media age limits for children (50 minutes)
You will lead this item, and provide an update on the Government’s recent announcement to introduce
legislation to enforce a minimum age for access to social media. Ministers will then be invited to discuss the
issue, including:
o Sharing evidence-based suggestions of an appropriate age, and
o Suggesting complementary measures to support youth, parents and carers, and people in
vulnerable situations
• Ministers have been provided a paper ahead of the meeting, to enable the discussion.
Handling note:
Communications
• Mr Betts will open this item.
for
• You will then provide an update on work to progress the legislation and a minimum age for access to
social media.
• Mr Betts will then open the discussion to other Ministers.
Talking points
Minister
[Secretary Betts will open the item and then hand over to you]
Overview and request for information from OHMM members
the
• Thank you, Secretary.
by
• I hope all of you have had a chance to consider the paper which provides an outline of what I would like
to discuss today.
1982
• I provided an oral update to Cabinet on 23 September and have also engaged with Ministers Aly and
McBride through a youth forum on the age assurance trial.
Act
• Our Government’s leadership in taking on the platforms and social media companies is clearly driving real
behavioral change – whether BigTech would like to admit it or not.
FOI
o Meta’s announcement of Teen Accounts is a clear demonstration that social media companies are
seeing the writing on the wall.
the
• The key question to land is that of the appropriate age. My department has consulted with youth,
parents, academics and child-development experts, and community organisations, however there is no
consensus on a single age.
under
• I am also very conscious of the pressure already placed on parents who have to balance their children’s
freedoms in society with protecting them from harm. Therefore, parental consent is not currently part of
my recommended model. The onus will be on the platforms to do the right thing by our young people.
• This legislation is an important step towards protecting young Australians, however, legislation alone will
not be sufficient. I have heard directly from youth and parents that any ban won’t be effective without
Released
appropriate public education and supports for parents, carers and educators.
• It’s also important to acknowledge that many support services for vulnerable or marginalised youth, such
as youth mental health, professionally produced children’s content, or First Nations’ specific services,
currently reach their audience through social media.
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
5
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
• Therefore, I will also be proposing a range of complementary measures to the legislation.
I invite you to
propose programs in your respective portfolios that could be rolled out to support youth, parents and
carers transition to and manage this change.
• Programs could include awareness campaigns, digital literacy education, and consideration of ways to
maintain the reach of important support services.
• My department has already reached out to the Departments of Health, Social Services, Education, the
National Mental Health Commission and the National Indigenous Australians Agency seeking research,
evidence and ideas for complementary measures.
Legislative design
• The Secretary will now take us through the key aspects of the legislation which were listed in the paper
Communications
provided to you.
for
Facilitator’s Talking Points
Introduction
• As we all know, the Government has announced that legislation will be introduced this year to enforce
Minister
a minimum age for access to social media and other relevant digital platforms.
• The Prime Minister noted that Federal legislation will be informed by engagement with States and
the
Territories through National Cabinet and draw upon the Hon Robert French AC’s
Report of the
Independent Legal Examination into Banning Children’s Access to Social Media, commissioned by the
by
South Australian Government.
o The Report encouraged a Commonwealth-led approach.
1982
• The NSW and South Australian governments are holding a Social Media Summit on 10 and 11 October,
and will consider issues including:
Act
o impacts of social media on children and young people's wellbeing
FOI
o online safety
o social media's role in disinformation and misinformation
the
o addressing online hate and extremism, and
o how social media is changing the way government delivers services.
under
• Federal legislation is a logical step to ensure that all young Australians are better protected from online
harms, and that parents and carers are supported in a nationally-consistent manner to keep their
children safe.
• You may have also heard the announcement by Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, about the
immediate introduction of Instagram Teen Accounts in the US, Canada, UK and Australia. Teen
Released
Accounts will have built-in protections that limit who can contact teens and the content they see.
• My department is leading or facilitating two key initiatives in this space.
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
6
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
o The $6.5 million Age Assurance Trial, which is making good progress with the Request for Tender
to procure an independent provider to assess age assurance technologies currently open.
o The report of the independent review of the
Online Safety Act 2021, which is due to be delivered
to the Government by 31 October 2024.
• Before I call on the Minister to take us through an overview of the social media age limits legislation,
I would like to extend my appreciation to officials from your departments and agencies who are
generously contributing their time and ideas into the discussion about age limits and through the age
assurance trial.
• Minister – over to you.
Communications
[Minister Rowland speaks, notes above]
• Thank you Minister.
for
Legislative design
• Thank you Minister.
• I will go through the legislative design features and the reasoning behind each, and invite your views.
Minister
the
Legislative element
South Australia model
Existing or proposed
Questions/comments
by
(Hon Robert French AC’s
policy/legislation/
draft Bill)
governance
Age
14, 14-15 with parental
•
SA: Ban under 14s;
• What in your view
1982
consent
parental consent for
should be the
under 15 and 16-year
minimum age of
Act
olds.
access and why?
•
NSW: 16
• What might be the
•
Queensland Chief
unintended
FOI
Health Officer: 14
consequences of
•
Prime Minister’s
restricting access to
the
preference: 16
social media at ages
above 13?
Definition of social
Definition of
social media Defined under the Online
• To enable
under
media
services includes
relevant Safety Act. This excludes
introduction of the
electronic services
messaging and online
legislation this year,
(making messaging, SMS
games.
the department is of
and online games in
the view that the
scope)
definition of social
media under the
Released
OSA should suffice,
but there may need
to be some
exemptions.
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
7
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Legislative element
South Australia model
Existing or proposed
Questions/comments
(Hon Robert French AC’s
policy/legislation/
draft Bill)
governance
Role for
Parental consent for 14
• Onus on platforms.
• What are the
parents/parental
and 15-year olds
• Parental model not
arguments for and
consent
recommended to avoid
against allowing
putting more pressure
parents or carers to
on parents.
consent to allowing
their children to
access social media.
Responsibility/
Platforms to have two
• The regulator or courts
Communications
obligation
duties – prevent
will determine if a
For information only.
individual access, and on
platform has
for
the systems level take
demonstrated if they
reasonable steps to
have taken reasonable
prevent access
steps.
Access/Account
Duty applies to
access to
• Access includes both
creation
service
creation of new
For information only.
Minister
accounts and existing
access for children
the
under the minimum
age.
by
Exempt services
Class or service
The regulator will develop
The aim of exemptions is
designated by Minister –
guidance on what would
to incentivise ‘safe’
report says must be of
determine if services are
innovation by platforms.
1982
benefit and low/no risk
exempt.
Further, some support
Act
services are only
accessible through social
media, for example Kids
FOI
Helpline.
the
Regulation/penalties To be appointed/created • Online Safety Act and
/legislation
eSafety Commissioner
For information only.
at the Commonwealth
level
under
• Social media age limits
will be a new Part in
the OSA.
Complementary
We have heard widely
• What types of
measures
N/A
through targeted
supports would you
stakeholder consultations
consider appropriate
Released
that vulnerable youth,
and relevant to your
CALD, LGBTQIA+ youth, and
portfolios?
those living in regional and • Some examples are
remote areas, as well as
public awareness,
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
8
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Legislative element
South Australia model
Existing or proposed
Questions/comments
(Hon Robert French AC’s
policy/legislation/
draft Bill)
governance
parents and carers, will
education, healthy
need support.
alternatives, mental
health support.
Chair background
Topic
Engagement with Commonwealth departments and agencies
Communications
Following the 1 May announcement of the Age Assurance Trial, the department has
for
established a Cross Government Working Group to support the work of the age
assurance trial, which includes agencies with policy expertise on age assurance and
related technologies, and with responsibility for privacy, safety and security.
The Working Group has provided input into the development of the criteria against
which age assurance technologies will be assessed in the trial.
Minister
Membership of the Cross-Government Working Group
the
1. Attorney-General’s Department
2. Australian Institute of Criminology
by
3. Department of Education
4. Department of Finance
5. Department of Health
1982
6. Department of Home Affairs
7. Department of Industry, Science and Resources
Act
8. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development,
Communications and the Arts
9. Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet
FOI
10. Department of Social Services
11. eSafety Commissioner
the
12. National Indigenous Australians Agency
13. National Mental Health Commission
14. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
15. The Treasury
under
The group has met
four times since its establishment in May 2024, with the next meeting
scheduled for tomorrow 2 October.
Released
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
9
Document 3 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
Item 5: Other business and concluding remarks (5 minutes)
Secretary Betts will open and then hand back to you to lead this item.
We suggest you provide an opportunity for OHMM members to raise any further recent policy and
regulatory developments, or new evidence of harms, and raise outstanding issues or ask follow-up
questions.
Note: We have not confirmed updates for this item. However, we understand the following issues may be
raised:
•
AI deepfakes and the impact they have on schools: The Department of Education have advised their
representative will likely raise this as a topic for further discussion at the OHM.
Communications
You will then make your final remarks and close the meeting.
for
Talking points
[Secretary Betts will open the item and then hand over to you]
• Thank you for attending the Online Harms Ministers Meeting today.
Minister
• For this final item I’d like to open the floor for members to raise any other business.
the
• Would anyone like to provide an update?
by
• Would anyone like to raise a topic to discuss at a future OHMM?
• Thank you for supporting this discussion. I look forward to our next meeting.
1982
• I now draw this meeting to a close.
Act
Facilitator’s Talking Points
• For this final item, I will hand back to the OHMM Chair, Minister Rowland, to make some final remarks
FOI
and run through other business.
• Over to you Minister Rowland.
the
under
Minister Rowland’s background
Topic
Talking Points
If asked: will there • As the substance of our discussion today has focused on issues that will be
be a media
considered by Cabinet, there will not be a media release following this OHMM.
release following
Released
this meeting?
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
10
Document 3 Attachment E
PROTECTED: CABINET
Online Harms Ministers Meeting – Social Media Age Limits – Discussion Paper
• On 10 September, the Prime Minister announced that legislation will be introduced this
year to enforce a minimum age for access to social media and other relevant digital
platforms.
• The Minister for Communications is working towards introducing this legislation in
November 2024.
• This legislation will provide both immediate protection for young Australians, as well as
further incentive for ‘safe’ innovation by industry – not just for children, but for all users.
• The age for limiting social media access is yet to be determined. OHMM members are
invited to put forward views and evidence regarding suitable ages.
• The legislation, which will be a new Part in the
Online Safety Act, will consider the
following design parameters:
o
Mandatory obligation on social media services to take reasonable steps to
Communications
prevent children under the minimum age from accessing their service.
for
o
Exemptions for social media services if the service is on a list of ‘safe services’ as
determined by the regulator. Guidance will be developed before implementation
on what constitutes a ‘safe’ service.
o An
oversight function through the regulator to undertake activities such as
compliance monitoring, information gathering, audits and granting powers to
Minister
enforce penalties for breach of obligation.
the
o The age limit will apply to both the creation of accounts and access to social
media, i.e. those who already have an account but are under the minimum age.
by
o 12 month
deferred commencement after Royal Assent to provide industry with
sufficient time to develop and implement systems, and for the regulator to
develop guidance.
1982
o A
review of the measures within two years of commencement, or aligned with
the next review of the Online Safety Act.
Act
• Any limit to access won’t be effective without appropriate public education and
supports for parents, carers and educators.
FOI
• Components of these supports sit outside the remit and expertise of the
Communications Portfolio in terms of education, health and social supports where these
the
can make an impact in mitigating any unintended consequences of this legislative action.
• Further, for many support services for vulnerable or marginalised youth – such as youth
mental health, professionally produced children’s content, or First Nations’ specific
under
services – social media is vital to reaching their community or audience.
• OHMM members will be invited to discuss complementary measures to the legislation,
including awareness campaigns, digital literacy education, and ways to maintain the
reach of important support services to those who need it most. These could be
programs delivered through Government or private organisations.
Released
• OHMM members are invited to discuss other supports that the Government should
consider or that exist to surface in the awareness raising efforts around this issue, to
address some of the unintended consequences of mandating a minimum age of access
to social media.
Page
1 of
1
Document 3 Attachment F
OFFICAL: SENSITIVE
ATTACHMENT F
Summary: Potential portfolio discussion points
Minister
Interest
Possible questions
The Hon Tim Watts MP, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs
• Foreign state equities in social media platforms and impacts on
Has your department engaged with counterparts in relation to the
relations.
minimum age announcement? Notably the US or China?
Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, Minister for Indigenous Australians
• Isolate First Nations youth
Are there any existing measures that can be leveraged to mitigate
• Possible impacts for Target 17 of the National Agreement on Closing
potential consequences for First Nations youth?
the Gap -
by 2026 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have
equal levels of digital inclusion.
Are there any unforeseen consequences on Target 17 of the National
Agreement on Closing the Gap?
Communications
Are there any particular considerations for remote communities?
for
The Hon Amanda Rishworth MP, Minister for Social Services
• Extreme misogyny and gender-based violence
In their recent report Unlocking the Prevention Potential, the Rapid
• Recommendation 5 from the
Unlocking the Prevention Potential:
Review of Prevention Approaches to help stop gender-based violence
accelerating action to end domestic, family and sexual violence report
highlighted a number of priority areas including,
released in August 2024
is to:
Minister
Continually inspect, understand and adapt to the emerging and
1. engaging with men and boys in violence prevention, and;
changing role of technology. This should include understanding
2. early intervention initiatives.
the
and responding to the opportunities that technology may present, In relation to online harms, what impact would a minimum age for social
as well as the unintended consequences technology may cause or
media have on these priorities?
by
exacerbate.
Are there supporting measures, either existing or in development, for
these priorities?
1982
[If yes]
How could these be leveraged to mitigate reduced access to
Act
information or services for young women and men, e.g. any school or
community-based initiatives?
FOI
the
The Hon Mark Dreyfus KC, MP, Attorney-General
• Best interests of the child
Regarding exemptions, if children under the age limit are subsequently
• Privacy reforms – targeting/profiling of children, including for
exposed to harmful content on a service that has been designated as
advertising. AGD may note that the Privacy Act review did not
‘safe’ by the regulator and provided with an exemption, what
recommend a ban on targeting, particularly where this may be in the
under
repercussions could there be? Does the regulator accept some liability
best interests of the child
•
when designating a safe service?
Enforceability of the ban/extraterritoriality – what are the actions the
Government can take against these big overseas companies
Given the Privacy Act review did not recommend a ban on targeting,
• Liability – potentially shifts from platforms to Government if a
particularly where this may be in the best interests of the child, would it
platform is declared ‘safe’
be appropriate for privacy measures to be a consideration for any
Released
exemptions?
The Hon Stephen Jones MP, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Financial
• Risk of services leaving the market
How could age requirements impact competition? Are there
Services;
representing the Treasury portfolio.
• Anti-competitive regulation – applies to biggest services but smaller
considerations for allowing exemptions?
harmful services do not have to stop kids?
OFFICAL: SENSITIVE
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 6
OFFICIAL
Meeting/Event Brief
MB24-000669
To: The Hon Michelle Rowland MP, Minister for Communications
MEETING: New South Wales (NSW) and South Australia (SA) Social Media Summit – 10 & 11
October 2024
Timing: You are attending and speaking at the Adelaide Summit on Friday, 11 October 2024
Venue: Adelaide Convention Centre
You are addressing the Summit on the Australian Government’s position on a minimum age for
Communications
social media, age assurance and the online environment.
for
Our Proposed Objectives: Give an address on the Government legislating a minimum age for
social media.
Their Objective: NSW and SA are co-hosting a 2-day Social Media Summit. It brings together
experts, policymakers, academics and young people to explore key areas including the impacts of
social media on children and young people, online safety, social media’s role in disinformation
Minister
and misinformation, addressing online hate and extremism and how social media is changing the
way government delivers services.
the
Key Points:
by
SA and NSW minimum age announcements
1.
South Australia: On 7 September, the Premier of South Australia announced a proposed
ban on children under 14 years of age from accessing social media, and with parental
1982
consent at 14 and 15 years old, ahead of releasing a report by former High Court Chief
Justice Robert French examining legal avenues to restrict the use of social media by
Act
children.
2.
New South Wales: The NSW Government is open to restricting social media use but is
awaiting the summit’s findings before committing to reform. However, the Premier of
FOI
New South Wales has stated his support for a minimum age of 16.
the
NSW Have Your Say results
3. NSW Government ran a public Have Your Say survey on social media use and impacts in
August/September 2024. Key findings include:
a. There was strong community engagement – 21,000 people completed the survey.
under
b. Most people (87 per cent) believe that there should be an age limit – the most
common suggestion was 16.
c. Consensus on an age is split – 26 per cent 12-15 years, 40 per cent 16 years, and
30 per cent 18 years or even older.
d. Cyber security, inappropriate content and distractions are the top concerns of teens,
Released
and adults for themselves and their children.
e. 91 per cent of parents want more information on how to keep their kids safe online.
OFFICIAL
1
Document 6
OFFICIAL
Age Assurance Trial
4. The request for tender for the technology assessment closed on 8 October. The department
is currently assessing tenders and will seek to sign the contract and commence the trial
shortly.
5. Consumer research into Australian’s attitudes towards the use of age assurance
technologies for access to online services is underway. Preliminary findings are due in
mid-late November.
6. Targeted stakeholder consultation with young Australians, parent groups, academics, the
digital industry (including platforms), and community and civil society groups is complete.
We are organising further engagement with First Nations representatives, focusing on
youth.
Engagement with States and Territories
Communications
7. The Prime Minister has written to all State and Territory Premier and Chief Ministers
updating them on plans for national legislation to enforce a minimum age limit to social
for
media and requesting input by Friday 18 October 2024 on the following matters:
a. Evidence from each jurisdiction on preferred age limit from a youth development
perspective;
b. Threshold appetite among constituents on parental consent and permissions;
c. Views on grandfathering arrangements for existing account holders;
Minister
d. View on exemption for certain beneficial services (such as mental health,
education and child safety);
the
e. Assessment of impacts of phone bans in each jurisdiction.
f. Advice on wrap-around measures to support young Australians.
by
Sensitive and Critical Information:
8. Attendees will be interested in discussing the minimum age and the definition for social
media. These are two issues that will be settled following the Summit, after considering all
1982
available evidence and in consultation with states and territories.
Act
Name: Sarah Vandenbroek
Contact Officer: Andrew Irwin
FOI
Position: First Assistant Secretary
Division: Online Safety Branch
Division: Digital Platforms, Safety and Classification
Ph: s22(1)(a)(ii)
Ph: s22(1)(a)(ii)
the
Mob: s22(1)(a)(ii)
Date Cleared: 9 October 2024
under
Attachments:
Attachment A: Biographical Details
Attachment B: Talking Points
Attachment C: Programs for NSW and South Australia Summits
Released
OFFICIAL
2
Document 6 Attachment A
OFFICIAL
ATTACHMENT A
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS
MC and facilitator
Name: Ms Annabel Crabb
Position: MC and facilitator
Communications
Biography:
for
Annabel is a journalist at the ABC, author and presenter who has covered Australian politics for
25 years. Annabel is a creator, presenter and contributor to political, historical and documentary
television series. She is a prolific writer and commentator, known for her insightful and humorous
Minister
analysis on gender and current affairs. She hosts a top rating podcast and has won a Walkley
Award. Annabel is a journalist, commentator, celebrated baker and mother of three.
the
Keynote speaker
by
Name: Mr Mike Burgess AM
Position: Director-General
Organisation: Australian Security Intelligence
1982
Organisation (ASIO)
Act
FOI
the
Biography:
Mike is Australia’s fourteenth Director-General of Security and has led the Australian Security
Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) since September 2019. He has spent more than three decades as
under
an intelligence, security and technology professional, in both the public and private sectors. His
experience includes senior roles in security and intelligence and Australia’s largest
telecommunications provider, Telstra. He is an expert in intelligence, security, counter-terrorism
and counter-espionage. In 2024, he was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia for
significant service to public administration, particularly national security and intelligence.
Released
OFFICIAL
3
Document 6 Attachment A
OFFICIAL
Video presentations
Name: Dr Jonathan Haidt
Position: Author, The Anxious Generation: How the
Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of
Mental Illness
Organisation: Social psychologist at New York
University’s Stern School of Business
Biography:
Communications
Jonathan is a social psychologist at New York University’s Stern School of Business. His research
examines the intuitive foundations of morality, and how morality varies across cultural and
for
political divisions. He is the author of international bestselling books including
The Anxious
Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.
Since 2018, he has been studying the contributions of social media to the decline of teen mental
health and the rise of political dysfunction.
Minister
the
Name: The Honourable Mr Robert French AC
Position: Former Chief Justice of the High Court of
by
Australia
1982
Act
FOI
Biography:
the
Robert French AC, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, led the legal examination
into banning children’s access to social media. He is the Chancellor of the University of Western
Australia.
under
Released
OFFICIAL
4
Document 6 Attachment A
OFFICIAL
Panellists
Name: Professor Elizabeth Handsley
Position: President
Organisation: Children and Media Australia
Biography:
Elizabeth has been the President of Children and Media Australia for 14 years, actively
Communications
advocating for children’s rights as media users. She has more than 30 years’ experience as a legal
academic, specialising in constitutional law and children's media law. She is now the host
for
of
Outside the Screen, a podcast about screens in the lives of children and families, and a jazz
presenter at Radio Adelaide.
Name: Ms Kirsty Amos
Minister
Position: Principal
Organisation: Parafield Gardens High School (PGHS)
the
by
1982
Biography:
Act
Kirsty is the current Principal of Parafield Gardens High School (PGHS). She is a committed
educational leader with close to 30 years of experience. Her career has shaped a deep
FOI
understanding of diverse contexts including urban and rural, affluent and disadvantaged—and
how they impact education. Passionate about fostering inclusivity, Kirsty implemented a mobile
the
phone ban at PGHS in 2021 to address the negative effects on learning and social cohesion. She is
dedicated to creating a supportive environment that empowers all students to succeed.
under
Name: Ms Sonya Ryan OAM
Position: Founder and CEO
Organisation: The Carly Ryan Foundation
Released
OFFICIAL
5
Document 6 Attachment A
OFFICIAL
Biography:
Sonya is the founder and CEO of The Carly Ryan Foundation. Carly Ryan was 15 years old when
she was murdered by an online predator. Determined to help prevent harm to other innocent
children and to help them navigate their online journey safely, Carly’s mum Sonya, shared her
lived experience and established The Carly Ryan Foundation in 2010. She has led efforts to make
Australia one of the toughest nations for online crime and is a champion for online safety and
crime prevention.
Name: Ms Jessica Mendoza-Roth
Position: Co-Founder of Wait Mate and
CEO of Social Impact Hub
Communications
for
Biography:
Jessica is the Co-Founder of Wait Mate and CEO of Social Impact Hub, movements for social
Minister
good. Wait Mate is a movement that empowers Australian parents to delay giving their child a
smartphone until at least high school. It connects parents in their child’s school year group once
the
10 families have signed up to take the pledge to wait, and is inspired by similar movements in the
United States. Social Impact Hub is an intermediary that provides advisory services and education
by
programs to mobilise people, organisations and capital for good.
1982
Name: Dr Simon Wilksch
Position: Clinic Director
Act
Organisation: Advanced Psychology Services and
Senior Research Fellow in Psychology at Flinders
University
FOI
the
Biography:
under
Simon is the Clinic Director of Advanced Psychology Services and Senior Research Fellow in
Psychology at Flinders University. He is dedicated to reducing the burden of eating disorders and
other mental health problems and has developed leading prevention and early intervention
programs with a strong evidence base. Advanced Psychology Services provides an eating disorder
Released
treatment service for 450 children, adolescents and adults each year, with 11 therapists.
OFFICIAL
6
Document 6 Attachment A
OFFICIAL
Name: Dr Danielle Einstein
Position: Adjunct Fellow
Organisation: School of Psychological Sciences,
Macquarie University
Biography:
Danielle is an Adjunct Fellow at the School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University and
is a registered clinical psychologist who specialises in the treatment of anxiety. She is
internationally known for her research on uncertainty and adolescent social media use. Danielle
started her career as Head of the Anxiety Clinic at Westmead Hospital. She wrote a theory on
Communications
uncertainty and was the first clinical psychologist to call for school phone bans. She strives to
provide parents and educators with the power to turn anxiety around.
for
Name: Ms Lauren Brooks
Position: Principal
Minister
Organisation: Saint Ignatius’ College
the
by
1982
Biography:
Lauren is the current Principal of Saint Ignatius’ College. She brings a wealth of experience from
Act
across the education sector, having held executive leadership roles in junior, middle and senior
schools in South Australia and the Northern Territory. Since her arrival at Saint Ignatius’ College
FOI
in October 2023, Lauren has been passionate about working alongside its students to shape the
future, together. She holds a Bachelor of Education from the University of Sydney, a Master of
the
Educational Leadership from the Australian Catholic University and is a member and graduate of
the Australian Institute of Company Directors.
Name: s47F
under
Positions: South Australian student representatives
Organisation: Teen Parliament
Biography:
Drawn from The Advertiser’s annual Teen Parliament, four students share the challenges of
Released
growing up in a digital world and how they navigate the dark side of social media. The Teen
Parliament features year 10, 11 and 12 students from across South Australia who are selected
based on their pitch for a big idea to make a brighter future for SA, which they spruik to their
peers.
OFFICIAL
7
Document 6 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
ATTACHMENT B
TALKING POINTS
Social media
• Social media services provide young Australians with a range of benefits
– as a means of social connection and an avenue for community and
identity building, and by providing access to support services, news and
information.
• At the same time, most people agree that social media is exposing young
Australians to a number of harms, including exposure to inappropriate
Communications
content, cyber bulling and online predators, and risking adverse
for
outcomes such as poor mental health and addictive behaviours.
o Many of these harms also stem from the addictive features of
algorithms.
• The Prime Minister announced on 10 September that the Government
Minister
will introduce legislation this year to enforce a minimum age for
the
accessing social media.
• Currently, there is no consensus on the age at which children can safely
by
participate in social media.
• It is therefore essential that the legislated minimum age, alongside
1982
complementary measures, achieves a balance between minimising the
harms experienced by young people, while supporting their access to the
Act
benefits of these services.
FOI
Legislative features
the
• A Commonwealth-led approach will ensure Australian children are better
protected from online harms, and that parents, carers and children are
supported in a nationally consistent manner.
under
• I welcome the close collaboration with States and Territories to inform this
work, including the recent work by former Chief Justice, Robert French on
behalf of South Australia.
• The exact age is yet to be settled, but I have been clear that any age limit for
Released
social media must be effective in the protection, not isolation, of young
people.
• What I do know, is that the proposed legislation will include the following
key features:
OFFICIAL
8
Document 6 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
o A mandatory obligation for social media services to take reasonable
steps to prevent children under the minimum age from accessing
their service.
o The legislation will place the compliance onus on platforms, not
users.
o The legislation will establish eSafety as responsible for regulatory
oversight and enforcement.
o An exemption framework designed to create positive incentives for
social media services to develop age appropriate versions of their
apps.
o
Communications
A 12-month implementation timeframe to provide industry and the
regulator with time to implement systems and processes.
for
o A review of the measures within two years of commencement.
Comprehensive approach to improving online safety:
• While this legislation is an important step towards protecting young
Minister
Australians and creating new social norms, this legislation is only one part of
the
our wider efforts to keep Australians safe online.
•
by
I have heard from youth and parents that giving effect to a minimum age
will be most effective if complemented with appropriate public education
and supports for young people, parents, carers and educators.
1982
• I have also brought forward the independent review of the Online Safety
Act
Act, to investigate broad issues such as a potential duty of care on
platforms, penalties, and the role of evolving technologies such as
FOI
generative AI and recommender systems.
the
Q&A
How are you deciding on the age?
under
• We are consulting widely with young people, parents, community
organisations and experts, but there is no consensus about the ‘right age’.
We are working closely with states and territories to understand their views
on these issues before deciding.
Released
How are you working with states and territory governments?
OFFICIAL
9
Document 6 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
• Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote to the Premiers and Chief Ministers
last week to seek their views on what the age limit should be, including
evidence to inform this from a youth development perspective.
• We are also seeking feedback from states and territories on a range of
issues including:
o The community appetite on the role for parental consent to feature
as a factor for age limits and permissions;
o Grandfathering arrangements for existing account holders;
o Views on the need for a safety net or exemption for support services
such as mental health and education;
o
Communications
What state-based supports they have in place that are not on social
media to help children – particularly those who are vulnerable or
for
isolated who use social media to connect or access support services.
Will there be grandfathering arrangements for existing account holders?
Minister
• We are waiting for feedback from states and territories to understand their
the
views on these issues before deciding.
by
• We are thinking through the full range of benefits and unintended
consequences that grandfathering may present.
•
1982
For example, the 12-month implementation timeframe presents a window
for people under the minimum age to set up accounts before the minimum
Act
age is enforced. On the other hand, grandfathering acknowledges that
changing the expectations for young people who already use social media is
FOI
difficult.
the
Justice French’s model proposed parental consent for 14 and 15-year-olds.
Will the commonwealth legislation include this feature?
under
• We are considering the pros and cons of a parental consent model and have
engaged directly with parents to understand their willingness to provide
consent.
•
Released
One of the things I heard in consultation with parents is that they are
overwhelmed by the load of dealing with their kids’ access to social media,
balancing inclusion and harms. And I’m personally conscious of the
additional privacy implications this may raise.
OFFICIAL
10
Document 6 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
How does the minimum age for social media intersect with the age assurance
technology trial?
• The Request for Tender for the technology trial closed on 8 October.
• Any regulation using age as a requirement online, including for example
requirements for age assurance to access pornographic material under the
eSafety Commissioner’s Phase 2 codes process, would require effective age
assurance. The same is true of any given age to access social media, with
Communications
additional considerations given it will be dealing with children’s information.
for
What if kids get around age assurance technology, for example using a VPN?
• We realise that no solution will be perfect and there will undoubtedly be
young people who find workarounds to access social media. A legislated
Minister
minimum age creates a new social norm and provides a consistent starting
the
point from which parents and educators can speak to young people about
by
the risks associated with social media use.
1982
How are you regulating international companies based in other jurisdictions?
• We already regulate the social media industry through the Online Safety Act
Act
and work constructively with companies and industry bodies. Although we
have had issues with some platforms, the majority are compliant and work
FOI
with the regulator constructively.
the
• We will also work with our international partners, including the United
Kingdom through the historic Online Safety and Security Memorandum of
Understanding, which I signed earlier this year.
under
How are you defining social media for the purposes of the trial? Are games
included?
• We have a starting point, in the definition of a social media service under
Released
the Online Safety Act 2021. We are considering further refining this
definition to ensure it is fit for purpose.
OFFICIAL
11
Document 6 Attachment B
OFFICIAL
•
[If you wish to go into detail] We are conscious of the balance between
connection and harms, and the presence of other regulation. As such, my
current view is that messaging apps will not be captured by this definition.
Neither will online gaming, which is also subject to the Classification
Scheme which provides clear guidance for parents on the suitability of
content.
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
OFFICIAL
12
Document 6 Attachment C
OFFICIAL
ATTACHMENT C
Program: Day 1
Thursday, 10 October 2024, ICC Sydney
Social Media Summit, Sydney
Morning
Welcome
Opening address
The Honourable Chris Minns MP Premier of New South Wales
The Honourable Peter Malinauskas MP Premier of South Australia
Keynote address - Social media and mental health
Dr Jean Twenge Professor of Psychology at San Diego State University and author
Communications
Panel discussion 1
Panel discussion 2
Panel discussion 3
Panel discussion 4
for
Growing up in a
The digital generation
Navigating truth decay Digital dangers -
digital world: Social
- Understanding how
- Fake news, AI and
Bullying, misogyny
media’s impact on
young people use
misinformation
and extremism
youth development
social media and
mental health and
digital tech
Minister
efficacy
Moderator:
Moderator: s47F
Moderator: s47F
Moderator: s47F
the
s47F
by
Panellists
Panellists
Panellists
Panellists
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
1982
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
Act
• Plenary session
• s47F
FOI
Afternoon
Keynote address and Q&A The time to act is now - standing up to big tech and
the
demanding safer social media for Australia's children
s47F
Data scientist and social media accountability advocate.
Youth workshop – Part 1
under
A youth delegate workshop lead by The Honourable Rose Jackson MLC, Minister for
Youth, and facilitated by s47F
, Advocate for Children and Young People
(ACYP).
Panel discussion 1
Panel discussion 2
Panel discussion 3
Panel discussion 4
Digital parenting:
Identity and
Digital rights of the
Teaching the digital
Released
Challenges and
belonging: Finding
child: Data, privacy
child: the impact of
strategies
community online
and consumer
social media on
protection
education and learning
Moderator: s47F
Moderator: s47F
Moderator: s47F
Moderator: s47F
OFFICIAL
13
Document 6 Attachment C
OFFICIAL
Panellists
Panellists
Panellists
Panellists
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
• s47F
Levelling Up – Safeguarding our Digital Future
• Ms Julie Inman Grant
• Ms Alice Dawkins
• Ms Lydia Khalil
Youth workshop – Part 2
A youth delegate workshop lead by The Honourable Rose Jackson MLC, Minister for Youth,
and facilitated by s47F
, Advocate for Children and Young People (ACYP).
Communications
Rapporteur summary Summit Rapporteur s47F
and Youth Rapporteur s47F will
for
deliver a summary of insights and reflections from day one of the Summit.
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
OFFICIAL
14
Document 6 Attachment C
OFFICIAL
Program: Day 2
Friday, 11 October 2024, Adelaide Convention Centre
Social Media Summit, Adelaide
Draft program
09:15am – 9.50am
Guest registration
Morning
Welcome and acknowledgements
Greeting to Spirit of Place
: Jakirah Telfer
Video address: Dr Jonathan Haidt (TBC)
The Honourable Peter Malinauskas MP
Communications
Premier of South Australia
for
The Honourable Chris Minns MP
Premier of New South Wales
Panel discussion: The Advertiser Teen Parliament
s47F
Minister
the
by
Video address: The Honourable Robert French AC
Expert Solution Panel Session One: Regulatory and Legislative
1982
Protection
· Kirsty Amos, Incoming Chief Executive, SA Secondary
Act
Principals’ Association (SA) and Principal, Paralowie Gardens
High School
FOI
· Professor Elizabeth Handsley - School of Law, Western Sydney
University and President of Children and Media Australia
the
· Sonya Ryan OAM, Founder, Carly Ryan Foundation
· Jessica Mendoza-Roth, Co-Founder, Wait Mate
Audience Q&A
under
12:15pm – 12:55pm
Lunch
Afternoon
The Honourable Michelle Rowland MP
Federal Minister for Communications
Keynote address: Mike Burgess AM
Released
Director-General of Security, Australian Security and Intelligence
Organisation
Expert Solution Panel Session Two: Public Health, Prevention and
Education
OFFICIAL
15
Document 6 Attachment C
OFFICIAL
· Lauren Brooks, Principal, St Ignatius College
· Dr Danielle Einstein, Clinical Psychologist, Macquarie
University
· Dr Simon Wilksch, Psychologist and researcher, Flinders
University
Audience Q&A
Closing remarks
3:00pm
Summit concludes
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
OFFICIAL
16
Document 7
PROTECTED CABINET
MS24-002038
To: The Hon Michelle Rowland MP, Minister for Communications (for decision)
Subject: Release of Exposure Draft – Social Media Minimum Age Bill
Critical Date: Please action by COB 29 October 2024, to allow for the Exposure Draft of the Bill
and draft Rules to be shared prior to your meeting on 31 October 2024.
Recommendations:
Communications
1. That you
agree to share an Exposure Draft of the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media
Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (
Attachment A)
and draft Online Safety (Age-Restricted Social
for
Media Platforms) Rules 2024
(
Attachment B)
with the Hon Robert French AC, on the
basis he will maintain confidentiality and not further distribute materials shared.
Agreed / Not Agreed
Minister
the
by
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
Date:
1982
Comments:
Act
FOI
the
Key Points:
1.
This brief seeks your agreement to release an Exposure Draft of the Online Safety
Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (the draft Bill) and the draft Online Safety
(Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms) Rules 2024
(the draft Rules). As the minimum age for
under
social media access has not yet been determined, it will instead by denoted by a ‘[TBC]’ in the
draft Bill.
a. The draft Bill remains with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel’s (OPC) editorial
team for final editorial review. If an updated version of the Bill is provided following
your approval, the department proposes to release that version instead.
Released
2.
On Thursday 31 October, you are meeting with the Hon Robert French AC to discuss the
effectiveness and enforceability of the draft Bill (
MB24-000758 refers). Sharing the draft Bill and
Rules ahead of this meeting will support the best use of Mr French’s legal and subject-matter
expertise.
a. On Friday 1 November 2024, your office and the Department are consulting with key
industry stakeholders on the proposed legislation.
PROTECTED CABINET
1
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
Document 8
• The department has worked closely with the office of the eSafety Commissioner
throughout the legislative drafting process.
Objectives:
Stakeholder
Our proposed objective
Their proposed objective
The Hon Robert
To seek Mr French’s view on the Mr French will likely be
French AC
draft Bill, in particular in relation interested in discussing the
to its effectiveness and
differences between his approach
enforceability.
and the draft Bill.
eSafety
To seek Ms Inman Grant’s view s47C
Commissioner
on the draft Bill, in particular in
relation to its effectiveness and
enforceability.
Communications
for
Minister
Mental health
To seek feedback on the key
Many mental health
organisations
design principles of the draft Bill organisations have expressed
the
and any redline issues that may
concern that the legislation may
by
not have been considered. The
hinder the ability for young
exemptions framework will be a
people to access supports. They
particular focus.
may have views on appropriate
exemptions.
1982
Act
Key Points:
1. Since the announcement of the legislation, there has been a lot of interest, opinions and media
FOI
coverage on the issue – in particular around a minimum age, isolation of vulnerable youths
and the obligation across the technology stack.
the
2. The key design principles you announced at the Social Media Summit on 11 October were
agreed by Cabinet on 7 October.
3. Any changes to these settings would require agreement by Cabinet or the Prime Minister.
Stakeholder Implications
under
Mr French
4. The department does not anticipate any implications for Mr French. During a meeting with the
department, Mr French did not have a strong position on an appropriate minimum age or
parental consent and recognised the challenges of the legislation and the constricted
implementation timeframes. Given the possibility of detailed conversation, the department has
Released
provided talking points for this meeting separated into ‘key’ and ‘additional’ topics.
5. Mr French noted that elements of the model in his report, notably the ages and parental
consent model, were set by the terms of reference provided to him by the South Australian
government.
PROTECTED
2
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
Document 8
Attachments:
Attachment A: Biographical Details (A1) and Talking Points (A2) – Hon Robert French AC
Attachment B: Talking Points – eSafety Commissioner
Attachment C: Biographical Details (C1) and Talking Points (C2) – Mental health organisations
Attachment D: Draft Bill
Attachment E: Draft Rules
Attachment F: Legislative design principles
Attachment G: Summary of state and territory responses to PM letter
Attachment H: Open letter from academics, experts and civil society organisations
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
4
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
ATTACHMENT A1
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS
Name: The Hon Robert French AC
Position: Former Chief Justice of the High Court of
Australia
Communications
for
Biography:
The Hon Robert French AC was appointed Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia in
September 2008, and served to January 2017. In September 2024, South Australian Premier Peter
Malinauskas released a report by Mr French outlining a legislative vehicle to ban children under
Minister
the age of 14 from accessing social media (with access granted to 14- and 15-year-olds with
parental consent). Mr French’s report and draft Bill have informed the design of the
the
Commonwealth legislation to enforce a minimum age of access to social media.
by
At the time of his appointment as Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, Mr French was a
judge of the Federal Court of Australia, having been appointed to that office in November 1986.
He graduated from the University of Western Australia in science and law. He was admitted in
1982
1972 and practised as a barrister and solicitor in Western Australia until 1983 when he went to the
Western Australian Bar. From 1994 to 1998 he was President of the National Native Title
Tribunal. At the time of this appointment he was an additional member of the Supreme Court of
Act
the Australian Capital Territory and a member of the Supreme Court of Fiji. He was also a Deputy
President of the Australian Competition Tribunal and a part-time member of the Australian Law
FOI
Reform Commission. From 2001 to January 2005 he was president of the Australian Association
of Constitutional Law. Chief Justice French was appointed a Companion in the General Division
the
of the Order of Australia in 2010.
under
Released
PROTECTED
5
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
ATTACHMENT A2
TALKING POINTS – The Hon Robert French AC
Introduction
• Thank you for joining us today to discuss the Government’s draft legislation to enforce a
minimum age of access to social media platforms – the Online Safety Amendment (Social
Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (the Bill).
• The report and proposed law you drafted for the South Australian Government as part of
the Legal Examination into Social Media Access for Children has formed an important
basis for work at the Commonwealth level.
Communications
• I understand you met with representatives from my department in September to discuss
for
your approach, and the insights gained in this meeting have also informed our legislative
design.
• In drafting the federal legislation, we considered how your framework might be applied at
Minister
a national level, in particular, how we could integrate it into the existing framework of the
Online Safety Act 2021 (the OSA).
the
• I’m aware this was only provided to you in the last couple of days, so I appreciate the time
by
you’ve taken to examine it and to meet with us today.
• I ask that you keep the draft Bill and Rules confidential, along with the details of our
1982
discussion today.
Act
KEY TOPICS
FOI
Regulated activity
• The Bill establishes an obligation on social media platforms to take ‘reasonable steps to
the
prevent age-restricted users’ from having an account (proposed s63B).
• This places the onus on platforms to introduce systems and settings to ensure that under-
under
age children cannot create and hold a social media account. It would not punish a platform
for individual instances where child-users circumvent any reasonably appropriate
measures put in place by the platform – however, a failure to take action to limit such
circumventions could give rise to a breach.
Released
• The draft Bill takes a narrower approach to the obligation by regulating the act of ‘having
an account’, as opposed to ‘accessing’ social media more generally. As you recognised in
your report, there are costs and benefits associated with a legislated restriction. Our
PROTECTED
6
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
proposed approach seeks to strike a balance between protecting children and young people
from harm, while limiting the regulatory burden on the broader population.
• Importantly, the obligation would help to mitigate harms arising from the addictive
features that are largely associated with user accounts and profiles, such as algorithms
tailoring content, gamification to encourage regular participation, and ‘likes’ to activate
positive feedback neural activity.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
In your draft law, you proposed a wide meaning of the term ‘access’ that was to underpin
the obligation on platforms. Did you consider any options for a narrower approach?
Communications
IF ASKED – Why doesn’t the obligation include a ‘duty of care’ element?
• My department carefully considered the option of couching the obligation within a ‘duty
for
of care’ framework, as is proposed in your draft law.
• The independent review of the OSA will outline a path forward for online safety reform,
including an expected call for the implementation of a ‘duty of care’ approach for online
Minister
industry.
the
• The introduction of a duty of care in the OSA would be a seismic change to the current
by
framework, which adopts a largely content and complaints-based approach. While a duty
of care model would likely provide greater protections to Australians, significant work will
be required to develop an effective model that holds industry to account. As such, for the
1982
purposes of this Bill, we have opted out of a duty of care approach as there will be an
Act
opportunity to consider this further in the context of the OSA review.
FOI
Regulated population
•
the
The obligation will apply to ‘age-restricted social media platforms’, a new term being
introduced into the OSA (proposed s13B). This largely draws on the existing definition of
‘social media service’ (s13), with a modification to expand the ‘sole or primary purpose’
under
test to a ‘significant purpose’ test.
• While the definition casts a wide net, flexibility to reduce the scope or further target the
definition is available through legislative instruments. Achieving this through instruments,
rather than primary legislation, allows the Government to be responsive to changes and
Released
evolutions in the social media ecosystem.
• An instrument-making power is available to provide additional conditions that must be
met, in order to fall within the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’.
PROTECTED
7
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
o As an example, this could include the number of monthly active users a platform
must have, before falling within scope.
• An instrument-making power is also available to exclude specific classes of services from
the definition. In the first instance, this power may be used to carve out instant messaging,
online games, and services that primarily serve to support education or health outcomes.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’?
IF ASKED – Why are instant messaging apps and online games excluded from the definition?
• In the case of messaging apps, while users can still be exposed to harmful content by other
Communications
users, they do not face the same algorithmic curation of content and psychological
manipulation to encourage near endless engagement. Further, including messaging apps
for
could have wider consequences, such as making communication within families harder.
• Online games are currently regulated under the National Classification Scheme. The
Scheme provides information on the age suitability of online games through a combination
Minister
of the classification and relevant consumer advice. Imposing additional age-based
the
regulation to online games would create unnecessary regulatory overlap.
by
IF ASKED – Why was the ‘sole or primary’ purpose test changed?
• Under s13 of the OSA, a condition of being a ‘social media service’ is that its
sole or
1982
primary purpose is to enable online social interaction. This is a very focused requirement
Act
that could offer platforms greater opportunity to argue they are out of scope, particularly as
their service-offerings expand and evolve.
FOI
IF ASKED – Is there a risk that regulating the act of ‘having an account’, as opposed to
the
‘accessing’ social media, will encourage social media platforms to allow content on their services
to be viewed by non-account holders (similar to the YouTube model)?
under
• There will be an opportunity to reconsider this following a two-year review of the
minimum age being in place to determine whether the scope of the regulated activities and
services is appropriate.
Exemption framework
Released
• Platforms within scope of the definition may seek an exemption from the obligation, by
applying to the eSafety Commissioner (proposed s63D).
PROTECTED
8
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
• The Commissioner will be empowered to make a legislative instrument, setting out the
criteria that platforms must meet in order to be exempted under this framework.
• This is a key component of the framework, providing a positive incentive for safe
innovation to platforms that wish to access the market for under-age users. Platforms that
do not employ harmful features may apply for an exemption. The harmful features in
question will focus on design elements of platforms, such as the algorithmic feeds that can
have a devastating effect on mental wellbeing, sleep and physical activity. This can
exacerbate psychological or mental health changes such as negative body image.
• The criteria will be co-designed with experts, industry and children, to ensure it strikes the
right balance between protecting children from the harmful effects of social media, while
Communications
continuing to facilitate the benefits it can bring.
for
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on what should be included in the exemption criteria?
IF ASKED – Why is the exemption criteria being deferred to regulations rather than being set out
Minister
in the OSA?
the
• Design of the criteria will be complex and crucial. It will be the subject of intense scrutiny
by
both from those wanting to ensure that children are adequately protected, and from
platforms seeking to minimise the burden required on them to access a younger market. As
such, I am proposing that the details of the exemption framework will feature in
1982
regulations. This will allow for a considered, co-designed approach to be taken. The
Act
regulations would be finalised by the third quarter of 2025, ahead of the implementation of
the legislation.
FOI
• The objective of the criteria is to encourage platforms to adopt safety-by-design principles,
the
and submit to the Commissioner for assessment of their mitigations. This drives
improvement in the market, while providing an opportunity for connections, not harms, to
flourish.
under
Parental consent
• The Bill does not incorporate parental consent as an exemption to the minimum age
obligation.
Released
• Parental consent is likely to be complex to administer and result in a significant increase in
the volume of data collected by platforms. For example, in addition to establishing that a
PROTECTED
9
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
person is an under-age user, the platform would need to establish the identification of the
parent or carer, as well as to confirm that relationship.
• It would also undermine a key objective of the policy, which is to support and empower
parents, rather than putting more pressure on them.
Grandfathering
• The Bill does not include grandfathering arrangements for existing under-age users.
• The Bill will instead provide a one-year implementation timeframe (at a minimum),
allowing for an adequate transition, while preserving an equitable treatment for all users
below the minimum age.
Communications
• Grandfathering is likely to be very difficult to administer, and could incentivise the mass
creation of child accounts ahead of the Bill’s passage and implementation.
for
IF RAISED – ADDITIONAL TOPICS
Age
Minister
• We are still finalising the question of age.
the
• There is no robust evidence that provides a definitive answer on a single age. Multiple
by
experts at the NSW Government’s Social Media Summit all provided differing views,
ranging from an age of 14 to 16, to contesting whether there should be any minimum age.
•
1982
At the same time, there is broad agreement that social media is exposing young
Australians to a range of harms, many stemming from the addictive features of platforms.
Act
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Based on your reading of the draft Bill and how it would operate, does that suggest a
FOI
higher or lower age?
the
Privacy safeguards
• The practical effect of the minimum age obligation on platforms is that they will likely be
under
required to undertake some form of age assurance on account holders, as a means of
satisfying the ‘reasonable steps’ requirement.
• ‘Age assurance’ encompasses a range of methods for estimating or verifying the age or
age range of users. Each method relies on data and personal information as an input, but
Released
may differ in the amount and type of data required.
• The Bill incorporates strong protections for personal information collected by platforms
for age assurance purposes (proposed s63H).
PROTECTED
10
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
• Importantly, these provisions provide that platforms must not use that information for any
other purpose, unless explicitly agreed by the user. This agreement must be voluntary,
informed, current, specific and unambiguous – this is an elevated requirement that
precludes platforms from seeking consent through preselected settings or opt-outs. In
addition, once the information has been used for age assurance, it must be destroyed or
de-identified by the platform.
• Serious and repeated breaches of these provisions could result in penalties of up to
$50 million (s13G of the
Privacy Act 1988).
IF ASKED – Will the minimum age obligation result in platforms asking all users to upload
Communications
government-issued ID?
• There are a range of age assurance methods available to platforms that would not involve a
for
comprehensive collection of formal ID.
• The Government is undertaking an age assurance trial that will evaluate the available
technologies against their privacy implications and reliability, and provide a robust tool for
Minister
assessing different approaches.
the
• The outcomes of the trial will inform the development of regulatory guidance by the
by
eSafety Commissioner on the age assurance methods that are considered appropriate.
• At the same time, the privacy safeguards in the Bill impose robust obligations on platforms
1982
to protect, ringfence and destroy any information collected, including government-issued
ID, with serious penalties applicable for any breach of these requirements.
Act
Additional regulator powers
FOI
• The Bill equips the Commissioner with additional tools and powers to effectively
the
administer the new minimum age framework. This includes:
o The ability to impose conditions when exempting platforms from the minimum age
obligation.
under
o Information-gathering powers, that allow the Commissioner to request information
from platforms about how they are complying with the obligation.
o A power to direct internet search engines to remove links to platforms considered
to be in breach of the obligation.
Released
o A power to direct app distribution services to cease enabling users to download
apps for platforms considered to be in breach of the obligation.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
PROTECTED
11
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment A
•
Do you have any views on whether the powers are sufficient and proportionate?
Penalties
• In making these reforms, it is critical we send a clear signal to platforms about the
importance of their social responsibilities to children and all Australians. As such, the Bill
is expected to impose significant penalties for breaching the minimum age obligation. This
could be as high as $50 million, consistent with serious offences set out in the
Privacy Act
1988 and
Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
Commencement
• The minimum age obligation on social media services will commence no earlier than
Communications
12-months after Royal Assent, on a day to be specified (proposed s63C). This flexibility
for
on the when the obligation commences will allow time for social media platform to
develop and implement required systems.
• It will also allow for finalisation of the Age Assurance Trial, which will provide guidance
Minister
on market readiness of age assurance technologies, and inform advice to Government and
the eSafety Commissioner on implementation and enforcement of the minimum age.
the
by
Review
• Finally, review of the legislation two years after effective commencement (proposed
1982
s239B) will provide the Government with an opportunity to recalibrate policies, if
required, to be proportionate to changed behaviours – of both digital platforms and young
Act
people.
FOI
• It will allow time to recognise any technological advancements since commencement, to
reconsider the definition of an age-restricted social media platform, and to consider
the
whether other digital platforms such as online games or additional social media platforms
that can be viewed without an account or profile, should be captured within scope.
under
• The review point will also provide an opportunity to reassess the evidence base
surrounding young people’s mental health and wellbeing, and the impacts of social media
platform, as a measure of success of the legislation.
Released
PROTECTED
12
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment B
ATTACHMENT B
TALKING POINTS – eSafety Commissioner
Introduction
• Thank you for taking the time today to discuss the Government’s draft legislation to
enforce a minimum age of access to social media platforms – the Online Safety
Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (the Bill).
• In drafting the legislation, my department has been working closely with your office to
ensure eSafety’s expertise is considered and reflected in the design of the Bill.
Communications
KEY TOPICS
for
Regulated activity
• The Bill establishes an obligation on social media platforms to take ‘reasonable steps to
prevent age-restricted users’ from having an account (proposed s63B).
Minister
• This places the onus on platforms to introduce systems and settings to ensure that under-
age children cannot create and hold a social media account. It would not punish a platform
the
for individual instances where child-users circumvent any reasonably appropriate
by
measures put in place by the platform – however, a failure to take action to limit such
circumventions could give rise to a breach.
1982
• The approach of regulating the act of ‘having an account’, as opposed to ‘accessing’ social
media more generally seeks to strike a balance between protecting children and young
Act
people from harm, while limiting the regulatory burden on the broader population.
FOI
• Importantly, the obligation would help to mitigate harms arising from the addictive
features that are largely associated with user accounts and profiles, such as algorithms
the
tailoring content, gamification to encourage regular participation, and ‘likes’ to activate
positive feedback neural activity.
under
Regulated population
• The obligation will apply to ‘age-restricted social media platforms’, a new term being
introduced into the OSA (proposed s13B). This largely draws on the existing definition of
Released
‘social media service’ (s13), with a modification to expand the ‘sole or primary purpose’
test to a ‘significant purpose’ test.
PROTECTED
13
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment B
• While the definition casts a wide net initially, flexibility to reduce the scope or further
target the definition is available through legislative instruments. Achieving this through
instruments, rather than primary legislation, allows the Government to be responsive to
changes and evolutions in the social media ecosystem – as well as the ability to manage
the regulatory and administrative burden that will arise from the framework.
• An instrument-making power is available to provide additional conditions that must be
met in order to fall within the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’.
o As an example, this could include the number of monthly active users a platform
must have, before falling within scope.
• An instrument-making power is also available to exclude specific classes of services from
Communications
the definition. In the first instance, this power may be used to carve out instant messaging,
for
online games, and services that primarily serve to support education or health outcomes.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’?
Minister
IF ASKED – Why is the obligation being imposed on social media platforms, rather than at the
the
app-store or device level?
by
• The Government has already announced the obligation on platforms.
• However, we would welcome social media platforms contracting with app stores, service
1982
providers and manufacturing companies, where this partnership could amount to
reasonable steps for age assurance.
Act
• This issue could be further examined as part of the review of the legislation that will occur
within 2 years of commencement.
FOI
the
IF ASKED – Why was the ‘sole or primary’ purpose test changed?
• Under s13 of the OSA, a condition of being a ‘social media service’ is that its
sole or
primary purpose is to enable online social interaction. This is a very focused requirement
under
that could offer platforms greater opportunity to argue they are out of scope, particularly as
their service-offerings expand and evolve.
Exemption framework
Released
• Platforms within scope of the definition may seek an exemption from the obligation, by
applying to the eSafety Commissioner (proposed s63D).
PROTECTED
14
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment B
• The Commissioner will be empowered to make a legislative instrument, setting out the
criteria that platforms must meet in order to be exempted under this framework.
• This is a key component of the framework, providing a positive incentive for safe
innovation to platforms that wish to access the market for under-age users. Platforms that
do not employ harmful features may apply for an exemption. The harmful features in
question will focus on design elements of platforms, such as the algorithmic feeds that can
have a devastating effect on mental wellbeing, sleep and physical activity. This can
exacerbate psychological or mental health changes such as negative body image.
• The criteria will be co-designed with experts, industry and children, to ensure it strikes the
right balance between protecting children from the harmful effects of social media, while
Communications
continuing to facilitate the benefits it can bring.
for
IF ASKED – Why is the exemption criteria being deferred to regulations rather than being set out
in the OSA?
• Design of the criteria will be complex and crucial. It will be the subject of intense scrutiny
Minister
both from those wanting to ensure that children are adequately protected, and from
the
platforms seeking to minimise the burden required on them to access a younger market. As
by
such, I am proposing that the details of the exemption framework will feature in
regulations. This will allow for a considered, co-designed approach to be taken. The
regulations would be finalised by the third quarter of 2025, ahead of the implementation of
1982
the legislation.
Act
• The objective of the criteria is to encourage platforms to adopt safety-by-design principles,
and submit to the Commissioner for assessment of their mitigations. This drives
FOI
improvement in the market, while providing an opportunity for connections, not harms, to
the
flourish.
Additional regulator powers
under
• The Bill equips the eSafety Commissioner with additional tools and powers to effectively
administer the new minimum age framework. This includes:
o The ability to impose conditions when exempting platforms from the minimum age
obligation.
Released
o Information-gathering powers, that allow the Commissioner to request information
from platforms about how they are complying with the obligation.
PROTECTED
15
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment B
o A power to direct internet search engines to remove links to platforms considered
to be in breach of the obligation.
o A power to direct app distribution services to cease enabling users to download
apps for platforms considered to be in breach of the obligation.
• These provisions have been prepared in consultation with your office. I note that further
work is ongoing to consider what else might be required and appropriate for the
framework.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on whether the powers are sufficient and proportionate?
Communications
IF RAISED – ADDITIONAL TOPICS
for
Age
• We are still finalising the question of age.
• There is no robust evidence that provides a definitive answer on a single age. Multiple
Minister
experts at the NSW Government’s Social Media Summit all provided differing views,
ranging from an age of 14 to 16, to contesting whether there should be any minimum age.
the
• At the same time, there is broad agreement that social media is exposing young
by
Australians to a range of harms, many stemming from the addictive features of platforms.
1982
Penalties
Act
• In making these reforms, it is critical we send a clear signal to platforms about the
importance of their social responsibilities to children and all Australians. As such, the Bill
FOI
is expected to impose significant penalties for breaching the minimum age obligation. This
the
could be as high as $50 million, consistent with serious offences set out in the
Privacy Act
1988 and
Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
under
Parental consent
• The Bill does not incorporate parental consent as an exemption to the minimum age
obligation.
• Parental consent is likely to be complex to administer and result in a significant increase in
Released
the volume of data collected by platforms. For example, in addition to establishing that a
person is an under-age user, the platform would need to establish the identification of the
parent or carer, as well as to confirm that relationship.
PROTECTED
16
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment B
• It would also undermine a key objective of the policy, which is to support and empower
parents, rather than putting more pressure on them.
Commencement
• The minimum age obligation on social media services will commence no earlier than
12-months after Royal Assent, on a day to be specified (proposed s63C). This flexibility
on the when the obligation commences will allow time for social media platform to
develop and implement required systems.
• It will also allow for finalisation of the Age Assurance Trial, which will provide guidance
on market readiness of age assurance technologies, and inform advice to Government and
Communications
the eSafety Commissioner on implementation and enforcement of the minimum age.
for
Review
• Review of the legislation two years after effective commencement (proposed s239B) will
Minister
provide the Government with an opportunity to recalibrate policies, if required, to be
the
proportionate to changed behaviours – of both digital platforms and young people.
by
• It will allow time to recognise any technological advancements since commencement, to
reconsider the definition of an age-restricted social media platform, and to consider
whether other digital platforms such as online games or additional social media platforms
1982
that can be viewed without an account or profile, should be captured within scope.
Act
• The review point will also provide an opportunity to reassess the evidence base
surrounding young people’s mental health and wellbeing, and the impacts of social media
FOI
platform, as a measure of success of the legislation.
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
17
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
ATTACHMENT C1
s47F
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
18
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
s47F
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
19
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
s47F
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
20
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
ATTACHMENT C2
TALKING POINTS – Mental health organisations
Introduction
• Thank you for joining me today to discuss the Government’s legislation to enforce a
minimum age of access to social media platforms.
• The Bill aims to minimise the risk of harms to young Australians from social media, place
responsibility on social media platforms for the safety of their users, and incentivise safe
innovation on digital platforms.
• We know, however, that social media platforms offer a range of benefits to young
Communications
Australians, including as an avenue for social connection and community building, and
for
access to support services, news and information.
• That’s why we are designing legislation that aims to strike a balance between protecting
children from online harms and maintaining their access to these benefits.
• I understand some of you participated in a roundtable organised by my department as part
Minister
of the age assurance trial. Your feedback has informed the key design principles of the
the
legislation.
by
• As organisations on the frontline of supporting young people’s mental health, your insights
today will be invaluable for this process.
1982
• I ask that you keep the details of our discussion today confidential, and do not distribute
any materials provided by my department further.
Act
FOI
KEY TOPICS
Age
the
• The Government is continuing to consider the minimum age. I note that no solution will be
perfect, and there is unlikely to be consensus among experts and the community on the
under
‘right’ age.
• We are aware that there is no robust evidence that provides a definitive answer on a single
age. Multiple experts at the NSW and SA governments’ Social Media Summit provided
differing views, ranging from an age of 14 to 16, to contesting whether there should be any
Released
minimum age.
PROTECTED
21
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
• I am interested to hear from you today about any views you have about an appropriate age,
particularly with reference to the demographics of your users, including through your
social media platforms compared with other communication channels
.
IF ASKED – When will the age be announced?
• The age will be included as part of the finalised Bill, which we are working to introduce
into Parliament by the end of this year.
Regulated activity
• The Bill establishes an obligation on social media platforms to take ‘reasonable steps to
prevent age-restricted users’ from having an account.
Communications
• This places the onus on platforms to ensure that underage children cannot create and hold
for
a social media account. It would not punish a platform for individual instances where a
child circumvents any systems put in place by the platform to prevent this – however, a
failure to take action to limit such circumventions could give rise to a breach.
Minister
• By regulating the act of ‘having an account’, as opposed to ‘accessing’ social media more
generally, the Bill seeks to strike a balance between protecting children and young people
the
from harm, while limiting the regulatory burden on the broader population.
by
• Importantly, the obligation would help to mitigate harms arising from the addictive
features that are largely associated with social media, such as algorithms tailoring content,
1982
gamification to encourage regular participation, and ‘likes’ to activate positive feedback
Act
neural activity.
FOI
Regulated population
• The obligation will apply to ‘age-restricted social media platforms’, which is a new term
the
being introduced into the Online Safety Act. Its definition includes that a ‘significant
purpose’ of the service is to enable online social interactions between 2 or more users.
under
• While this definition casts a wide net, the Bill allows for flexibility to reduce the scope or
further target the definition through legislative instruments.
• An instrument-making power is available to introduce additional conditions that must be
met in order to fall within the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’.
Released
o As an example, this could include the number of monthly active users a platform
must have, before falling within scope.
PROTECTED
22
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
• An instrument-making power is also available to exclude specific classes of services from
the definition. In the first instance, this power may be used to carve out instant messaging,
online games, and services that primarily serve to support education or health outcomes.
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’?
IF ASKED – Why are instant messaging apps and online games excluded from the definition?
• In the case of messaging apps, while users can still be exposed to harmful content by other
users, they do not face the same algorithmic curation of content and psychological
manipulation to encourage near endless engagement. Further, including messaging apps
Communications
could have wider consequences, such as making communication within families harder.
for
• Online games are currently regulated under the National Classification Scheme. The
Scheme provides information on the age suitability of online games through a combination
of the classification and relevant consumer advice. Imposing additional age-based
Minister
regulation to online games would create unnecessary regulatory overlap.
the
Exemption framework
by
• Platforms within scope of the definition may seek an exemption from the obligation, by
applying to the eSafety Commissioner.
•
1982
The Commissioner will be empowered to make a legislative instrument, setting out the
criteria that platforms must meet in order to be exempted.
Act
• The objective of the criteria is to encourage platforms to adopt safety-by-design principles.
This drives improvement in the market, while providing an opportunity for connections,
FOI
not harms, to flourish.
the
• The criteria will be co-designed with experts, industry and children, to ensure it strikes the
right balance between protecting children from the harmful effects of social media, while
continuing to facilitate the benefits it can bring.
under
• Platforms that do not use harmful features may apply for an exemption. The harmful
features in question will focus on design elements of platforms, such as the algorithmic
feeds that can have a devastating effect on mental wellbeing, sleep and physical activity.
Released
YOU MAY WISH TO ASK
•
Do you have any views on what should be included in the exemption criteria?
PROTECTED
23
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
IF ASKED – What will the new minimum age framework mean for at-risk children – such as those
who lack a safe home environment or are part of a marginalised community – who use social
media to access support and information, including in relation to mental health?
• We recognise that, in some cases, social media offers benefits for children and young
people, particularly for those accessing mental health services.
• We acknowledge that introducing a minimum age for social media will affect what is
currently a large channel for access to your services. However, we are neither turning off
the whole internet, nor confiscating phones from every young person.
• As such I would like to discuss ways that, in the context of a world with this framework,
we can all work to maintain overall access to your services. In particular, the inclusion of
Communications
an exemption framework means it will be open to platforms to continue providing this
for
beneficial access to under-age users once they have made the platform safe for all children.
• Further, the ability to exclude specific types of services from the definition, such as those
that primarily serve to support education or health outcomes, will support maintained
Minister
access for all children to these benefits.
• Would having messenger services outside of scope help youth reach your services?
the
by
IF ASKED – Why is the exemption criteria being deferred to regulations rather than being set out
in the OSA?
1982
• Design of the criteria will be complex and crucial. It will be the subject of intense scrutiny
both from those wanting to ensure that children are adequately protected, and from
Act
platforms seeking to minimise the burden required on them to access a younger market. As
FOI
such, I am proposing that the details of the exemption framework will feature in
regulations. This will allow for a considered, co-designed approach to be taken. The
the
regulations would be finalised by the third quarter of 2025, ahead of the implementation of
the legislation.
under
Review
• Review of the legislation two years after commencement will provide the Government
with an opportunity to recalibrate policies, if required, to be proportionate to changed
Released
behaviours – of both digital platforms and young people.
• It will allow time to recognise any technological advancements since commencement, to
reconsider the definition of an age-restricted social media platform, and to consider
whether other digital platforms such as online games should be captured within scope.
PROTECTED
24
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
• The review point will also provide an opportunity to reassess the evidence base
surrounding young people’s mental health and wellbeing, and the impacts of social media
platforms, as a measure of success of the legislation.
IF ASKED (additional topics)
Will the Bill include a model for parental consent?
• The Bill does not incorporate parental consent as an exemption to the age limit obligation.
• Parental consent is likely to be complex to administer and result in a significant increase in
the volume of data collected by platforms. For example, in addition to establishing that a
person is an under-age user, the platform would need to establish the identification of the
Communications
parent or carer, as well as to confirm that relationship.
• It would also undermine a key objective of the policy, which is to support and empower
for
parents, rather than putting more pressure on them.
Will there be grandfathering?
Minister
• The Bill does not include grandfathering arrangements for existing under-age users.
•
the
The Bill will instead provide a one-year implementation timeframe (at a minimum),
allowing for an adequate transition, while preserving an equitable treatment for all users
by
below the minimum age.
• Grandfathering is likely to be very difficult to administer, and could incentivise the mass
1982
creation of child accounts ahead of the Bill’s passage and implementation.
Act
Will this bill have a negative impact on privacy?
FOI
• The practical effect of the age limit obligation on platforms is that they will likely be
required to use some form of age assurance on account holders, as a means of satisfying
the
the ‘reasonable steps’ requirement.
• The Bill incorporates strong protections for personal information collected by platforms
under
for age assurance purposes. Importantly, platforms must not use that information for any
other purpose, unless explicitly agreed by the user. In addition, once the information has
been used for age assurance, it must be destroyed or de-identified by the platform.
• Serious and repeated breaches of these provisions could result in penalties of up to
Released
$50 million (s13G of the
Privacy Act 1988).
Will the age limit obligation result in platforms asking all users to upload government-issued ID?
PROTECTED
25
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
• There are a range of age assurance methods available to platforms that would not involve
collection of formal ID.
• The Government is undertaking an age assurance trial that will evaluate the available
technologies against their privacy implications and reliability, and provide a robust tool for
assessing different approaches.
• The outcomes of the trial will inform the development of regulatory guidance by the
eSafety Commissioner on the age assurance methods that are considered appropriate.
What penalties will exist for breach of the obligation?
• In making these reforms, it is critical we send a clear signal to platforms about the
Communications
importance of their social responsibilities to children and all Australians. As such, the Bill
is expected to impose significant penalties for breaching the minimum age obligation. This
for
could be as high as $50 million, consistent with serious offences set out in the
Privacy Act
1988 and
Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
Minister
What other regulatory powers will the eSafety Commissioner have?
• The Bill equips the Commissioner with additional tools and powers to effectively
the
administer the new age limit framework. This includes:
by
o The ability to impose conditions when exempting platforms from the age limit
obligation.
1982
o Information-gathering powers, which allow the Commissioner to request
Act
information from platforms about how they are complying with the obligation.
o A power to direct internet search engines to remove links to platforms considered
FOI
to be in breach of the obligation.
the
o A power to direct app distribution services to cease enabling users to download
apps for platforms considered to be in breach of the obligation.
under
When will the obligation commence?
• The minimum age obligation on social media platforms will commence no earlier than
12-months after Royal Assent, on a day to be specified (proposed s63C). This flexibility
on the when the obligation commences will allow time for social media platforms to
Released
develop and implement required systems.
PROTECTED
26
PROTECTED
Document 8 Attachment C
• It will also allow for finalisation of the Age Assurance Trial, which will provide guidance
on market readiness of age assurance technologies, and inform advice to Government and
the eSafety Commissioner on implementation and enforcement of the minimum age.
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
PROTECTED
27
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 8 Attachment G
Social media minimum age legislation – feedback from state and territory engagement
South Australia
New South Wales
Victoria
Western Australia
Northern Territory
Australian Capital
Queensland
Tasmania
Territory
AGE: What evidence
16
16
14
14, parental consent
In-principle support
Caretaker response
Caretaker
Response
your jurisdiction can
(NSW Health points to
for 14 and 15-year-
but
no age given.
response
Yet to be
provide on the preferred
varied development;
olds (in line with
Notes age should be
Received
age limit from a youth
response notes State
French report)
based in evidence,
development perspective
IDs focus on 16, but
considering social and
some Commonwealth
emotional isolation,
use 15)
disadvantage and
geographic impacts.
PARENTAL
No
No
No
Yes, for 14 and 15.
In-principle support
CONSENT: The
for parental role in child
threshold appetite among
development, but notes
Communications
your constituents on the
language barriers and
role, if any, for parental
different family
for
consent to feature as a
structures for First
factor or variant for age
Nations and other
limits and permissions
cultures.
GRANDFATHERING:
Limited, for 14 and 15-
No
No
In-principle support,
No firm view but
notes
Barr public comments:
Views on the desirability
year-olds with accounts,
(relies on 12-month
however ‘further work
risks outlined in
‘Doesn’t make sense’ to
Minister
for grandfathering
with parental controls.
lead time)
is required’ due to
French report –
remove existing users a
arrangements for
equity of access.
enforcement challenges
year or 2 before they
the
existing account holders
and potential to
regain access. Suggests
under the determined
undermine protection.
transitional arrangement
by
minimum age
could work.
EXEMPTIONS:
Yes
Yes
Nil
Yes, limited
In-principle support
Views on the need for a
As per French,
French as starting point,
Beneficial for young
1982
safety net or exemption
companies to seek
notes government and
people, such as mental
for certain services
exemption, based on
non-profit services, and
health or those required
deemed beneficial for
safety-by-design.
highlights use of
for education.
Act
young people (such as
Youtube in educational
mental health, education,
context.
FOI
or child safety accounts)
PHONE BANS:
Positive: ‘significant
Positive: ‘improved
In confidence – not for
Positive: ‘A 2023
Formal evaluation not
the
An assessment of the
improvement’
engagement and
public use
review concluded that it
yet available
impacts following your
interaction in both
Positive: ‘improved
is working well’.
Positive: ‘initial
jurisdiction's
classrooms and the
student focus on learning
indications of positive
implementation of a phone
playground’
and increased student
impacts on student
under
ban in schools.
socialization or physical
engagement and
activity during breaks’
reduction of
cyberbullying incidents
during school hours.’
Released
Document 8 Attachment H
The Rt Hon Anthony Albanese, MP
Prime Minister
Parliament House
Canberra, ACT 2600
Emailed: s22(1)(a)(ii)
@pm.gov.au CCed: s22(1)(a)(ii)
@pm.gov.au
October 21st 2024
Dear Prime Minister,
Communications
Re: Follow Up to Social Media Summits
for
Your office should have received our open-letter of October 9th 2024, regarding the proposals
for a social media ban for under 16-year-olds, signed by over 100 Australian academics, 20
world-leading international experts, and 20 Australian civil society organisations. The social
Minister
media Summits have now been held. Whilst the discussion was valuable, we maintain our view
that bans will not appropriately protect children and young people online.
the
We wish to offer our suggestions for alternatives to protect children and young people without
by
arbitrarily restricting their access to the benefits of technology.
1982
We note some of the encouraging statements made in Minister Rowland’s address to the
Summit in Adelaide on 11 October, including her acknowledgement of the views of children
Act
and young people that social media allows them to connect and feel socially included.
FOI
We applaud the Government’s strategic objective that social media must exercise a social
responsibility. We believe that these efforts in the community should be built around
the
measures to provide better support to children, young people, parents and families. At the
same time, the regulatory response should focus on creating obligations and incentives to
platforms to build appropriate protections and meaningful responses to evidence of harms.
under
We support Minister Rowland’s statement of the Government’s intent that the “key design
principle of the Commonwealth’s legislative approach is to place the onus on platforms, not
parents or young people.” However, we do not agree that an age limit for social media will help
to “signal a set of normative values that support parents, teachers, and society”.
Released
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
Social Media Age Limits
Issue: Australian children are accessing content online that is harmful.
Headline Talking Points: •
The Albanese Government is committed to minimising the harm that
comes from children accessing content online that is not appropriate for
them.
•
The Government has provided $6.5 million to conduct a trial of age
assurance technologies to protect children from harmful online content,
including on social media, and age-restricted content such as
pornography.
•
Communications
The Government will introduce legislation before the end of this year to
enforce a minimum age of 16 for access to social media and other digital
for
platforms.
Key points
•
Minister
The Albanese Government understands the urgency for parents who are
the
rightly concerned about the harmful impact to children of the ease of
by
access to age-inappropriate content such as online pornography, which is
1982
prolific and easily accessible, and the harms that exist on social media.
Act
• Parents are looking for real solutions to what is a legitimate national
FOI
concern about harmful online environments and addictive features on
the
social media that often target children.
under
• That is why the Government has announced that the minimum age for
access to social media in Australia will be 16.
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
1
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
• Our Government will introduce legislation this year to enforce the minimum
age for access to social media.
• I have made it clear that any age limit for social media access – and its
implementation – must be effective in the protection, not isolation, of
young people.
• Our approach will place the onus for compliance on the platforms, not
Communications
for
parents or children.
• We are setting a normative value for parents in determining that social
Minister
media in its current form is not suitable for use by young Australians. Our
the
decision has been guided by inputs from a range of stakeholders on the
by
appropriate age.
1982
• We are showing global leadership in taking this approach and we know that
Act
other nations are also seeking to act in the regulatory oversight of social
FOI
media.
the
• I have outlined the key design principles of the Commonwealth’s legislation
under
in my speech at the Social Media Summit, which was jointly hosted by NSW
and South Australian Governments on 10 and 11 October.
Released
• These principles are:
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
2
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
o That the Online Safety Act will be amended to establish social media
age limits.
o That the onus would be on platforms, not parents or young people.
o That penalties for users will not feature in our legislative design. It
will be incumbent on the platforms to demonstrate they are taking
reasonable steps to ensure fundamental protections are in place at
Communications
for
the source.
o eSafety, as the nation’s regulator on online safety matters will
Minister
provide oversight and enforcement of our measures. Using the
the
established Commonwealth framework will enable the government
by
to draw on the expertise of the Office of the eSafety Commissioner in
1982
the implementation and monitoring.
Act
o consideration of an exemption framework to accommodate access
FOI
for social media services that demonstrate a low risk of harm to
the
children. The aim is to create positive incentives for digital platforms
under
to develop age-appropriate versions of their apps.
o recognising the harmful features in the design of platforms that drive
Released
addictive behaviours, the government will set parameters to guide
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
3
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
platforms in designing social media that allows connections, but not
harms, to flourish.
o a 12-month implementation timeframe to provide industry and the
regulator time to implement systems and processes.
o a review of these measures to ensure they are effective and
delivering the outcomes Australians want.
Communications
for
• A Commonwealth-led approach will ensure that all young Australians are
better protected from online harms, and that parents and carers are
Minister
supported in a nationally-consistent manner to keep their children safe.
the
by
ON AGE ASSURANCE IF NEEDED
• For age assurance technologies to keep our children safe online, they need
1982
Act
to be effective. We also understand that it is critical to get privacy and
FOI
security right.
the
• On 10 September, we released the tender to procure an independent
technology provider to assess a range of technologies available on the
under
market, to inform our decision making on the best next steps to protect
Australian children.
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
4
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
• This approach aligns with the recommendation of the eSafety
Commissioner, made in the Roadmap for Age Verification, that age
assurance technologies should be trialled before seeking to mandate them.
• The Government has commenced all elements of the trial:
o A Request for Tender to undertake an independent assessment of a
range of age assurance technologies available on the market closed
Communications
for
on 8 October. Industry briefings for prospective tenderers were held
on 18 and 24 September and attended by interested parties from
Minister
Australia and overseas.
the
If asked: How will the delay in the completion of the technology trial
by
affect the age limit legislation?
1982
Answer: The legislation is on track for introduction this year and is not
Act
dependent on the completion of the technology trial. The legislation
FOI
has been informed by targeted stakeholder consultation already
the
undertaken through the age assurance trial, and with state and
under
territory governments.
The technology trial is important for the implementation of the
Released
legislation. This will be at least 12 months after the legislation is
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
5
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
passed. The information from the trial will particularly assist the
eSafety Commissioner to enforce and oversee the onus it places on
the platforms. The trial is expected to be completed by the first half of
2025, ahead of the commencement of the legislation. The technology
trial is complex and technical and will involve live-testing which
requires appropriate ethical and other approvals. While time-
Communications
consuming, this will mean that Australians can be confident that the
for
implementation, informed by the trial, will have been tested against a
range of criteria, including ease of use, privacy and data security.
Minister
o Consumer research into Australians’ attitudes towards the use of age
the
by
assurance technologies for access to both pornography and social
media, and their views on an appropriate minimum age for social
1982
Act
media access.
FOI
o A Cross-Government Working Group was established in May, to
the
inform all aspects of the trial including the criteria for technical
assessment, such as important questions of privacy and security. The
under
working group has met five times and group will continue to meet
throughout the duration of the trial.
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
6
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
o My department has completed consultation with young Australians,
parenting groups, academics and child development experts, the
digital industry (including social media companies, app stores and
hardware providers), community organisations, civil society groups
and First Nations youth.
Communications
for
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
7
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
Key messages from parents and child development experts
• In August, I attended a roundtable with parents and parent groups to hear
directly about their views and concerns about the benefits and harms of
social media and attitudes towards age assurance technologies.
• What I heard from that encounter is that parents see the harms that are
present for children on social media and want action from Government and
Communications
from platforms to address these issues.
for
• They also recognise that children engaging with each other online can have
great benefits and that young people’s digital literacy skills development is
Minister
important.
the
by
• I also met with young people, hearing directly from young Australians who
1982
will be directly affected by any decisions made by Government as a result of
Act
this trial.
FOI
• Parents told me they are overwhelmed with the prospect of managing
the
children’s social media access, and are calling for a cultural and/or a legal
under
change.
• Some suggested legislating an age limit now and implementing
Released
enforcement in the short-medium term.
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
8
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
• The parents and parents group generally acknowledged that children have a
right to access safe shared online spaces, and striking a balance between
the benefits and the harms is key.
• They also noted that social media has many benefits, including a way to talk
to and connect with friends, establish identity, and as a regulation tool for
neurodivergent children.
Communications
for
• However, it also can be addictive, provides an avenue for cyberbullying, and
algorithms show harmful or inappropriate content, such as horror and
Minister
pornography that children don’t want to see.
the
• Some of the actions suggested by the group were:
by
o An age limit for social media had strong support, though views on the
1982
specific age varied.
Act
o Digital literacy for children and parents is critical. Parents need
FOI
strategies to create healthy screen routines and support children to
the
safely use technology.
o
under
Technology does not have to have a perfect before we bring in laws.
We cannot wait for technology to catch up with aspirations. Instead
set the cultural norm and standards – then as technology improves,
Released
we implement it.
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
9
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
Meta’s announcement on introducing ‘teen accounts’ for Instagram
• The Government acknowledges Meta’s announcement that they will
introduce "teen accounts" for Instagram users under 18.
• Any development that genuinely makes social media safer and healthier for
young Australians is a welcome step because everyone has a role to play.
Evidence shows early access to social media can be harmful, and the
Communications
Government has been clear that the safety, as well as the mental and physical
for
health of young Australians is paramount.
Government policy intent / commitment
Minister
• On 1 May 2024, the Australian Government committed $6.5 million in the
the
by
2024-25 Budget to conduct a trial of age assurance technologies, as an
option for addressing both:
1982
Act
o Access to pornography by those under the age of 18; and
FOI
o Access to social media by children and young people.
the
• The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development,
under
Communications and the Arts is responsible for this trial, which will
examine the effectiveness of a range of technologies and assess how well
they work in an Australian context, given our privacy and security settings.
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
10
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
• The final design of the trial has been settled through cross-government
consultation, to ensure that a range of policy issues are considered.
• The Cross-Government Working Group on age assurance first met in May
and continues to meet monthly, with representation from the office of the
eSafety Commissioner, and agencies including the Attorney-General’s
Department, the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of
Communications
Education, the Department of Social Services, and the National Indigenous
for
Australians Agency.
Minister
Regulation and related work
the
• The trial is taking place at a time when the Government is thoroughly
by
examining how well online harms are being prevented, and whether there
1982
are any gaps in the current regulatory framework.
Act
• Our Government has prioritised online safety from the moment we formed
FOI
Government and I brought forward a review of the Online Safety Act by a
the
full year to ensure it was keeping up with growing harms online and
under
technologies that weren’t even thought of when the Act was passed, such
as generative AI.
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
11
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
• There are other streams of work within my portfolio that build on our
commitment to online safety:
o Development of Phase 2 industry codes under the Online Content
Scheme of the Online Safety Act, led by the eSafety Commissioner.
o An update of the Basic Online Safety Expectations Determination,
which sets out safety expectations for online service providers.
Communications
for
o Stage two reforms to modernise the National Classification Scheme.
Minister
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
12
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
Background
• Funding for the trial was announced on 1 May 2024 by the Prime Minister, the Hon
Anthony Albanese MP, following a meeting of National Cabinet on gender-based
violence.
• The eSafety Commissioner released a statement on 1 May 2024 welcoming the
announcement of the trial and noting the parallel work to develop the Phase 2 industry
codes.
• In June 2024, Opposition Leader the Hon Peter Dutton MP pledged to ban under-16-
year-olds from accessing social media by implementing age verification in the first 100
days of a Coalition government.
• The Request for Tender for an independent assessor to conduct the technology trial
was released to the market through tenders.gov.au on 10 September 2024.
•
Communications
On 7 September, the Premier of South Australia announced a proposed a ban on
children under 14 years of age from accessing social media, ahead of releasing a report
for
by former High Court Chief Justice Robert French examining legal avenues to restrict the
use of social media by children.
• On 10 September, the Prime Minister announced that the Government will introduce
legislation to enforce a minimum age for access to social media.
Minister
Anonymous quotes from parents, child-development experts and parent groups
consultation on 16 August:
the
• “We are battling multinational corporations that are going to find another way to
by
access children.”
• “We are battling addiction here. Need to decide on age, build in support mechanisms –
look out for measures that will extend beyond social media (such as addiction support)”
1982
• “Majority of parents in a survey reported having conflict with kids about social media –
regularly”
Act
• “We need to flip this argument – we want to hear about why a 13-year-old should be
on social media”
• “There is a huge appetite amongst parents to delay access to social media. Not any one
FOI
thing is going to fix this, but raising the age is a significant tool.”
the
Key Media
under
Media
Summary
News Corp Australia
Calls on the Government to raise the age of
Let Them Be Kids campaign
access to social media from 13- to 16-years-
old, enforced by age verification.
Released
Collective Shout
Calls on Government to commence the trial
Calls for age restrictions to online porn
without delay, and to focus on preventing
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
13
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
access to pornography now, with
consideration of social media to follow.
The Daily Telegraph
Trial on age verification for social media
and porn drowning in bureaucracy. Only
Labor pilot failing our kids
two of the three components of the trial
have started and the most crucial element
– the technology trial – has not begun.
Announcement by South Australian
On Saturday 7 September, Premier
Premier
Malinauskas announced a proposed a ban
on children under 14 years of age from
South Australia takes big leap to regulate
accessing social media, ahead of releasing a
social media | The Border Mail | Wodonga, report by former High Court Chief Justice
Communications
VIC
Robert French examining legal avenues to
for
Social media companies to face fines for
restrict the use of social media by children.
allowing children under 14 on their
• It recommends imposing statutory
platforms under proposed SA laws - ABC
duties of care on social media providers
News
to take all reasonable steps to prevent
Minister
access by any South Australian child
under 14 and by any South Australian
the
child aged between 14-16 without the
by
consent of their parents or guardian.
• Beneficial or low-risk social media
services would be exempt, as
1982
determined by the relevant minister or
regulator.
Act
• While it is legally possible for South
Australia to create its own regulator,
FOI
the report suggested the
Commonwealth could confer a new
the
state-based regulatory function on the
eSafety Commissioner.
News Corp Australia
On Tuesday 10 September, the Prime
under
Minister announced that his government
would introduce legislation to enforce a
‘Enough is enough’: Fed up PM confirms
minimum age for access to social media.
nationwide social media ban |
news.com.au — Australia’s leading news
site
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
14
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
Australian Financial Review
The Albanese government should force
social media giants such as Facebook and
Social media age limits: Daniel Petre warns of
Snapchat to develop systems to block
‘fundamental strategic error’ in social media
underage access if it is serious about
teen ban (afr.com)
protecting children and teenagers from
online harms.
Spending $6.5 million to trial technologies
to restrict social media to older teenagers,
rather than making the tech companies do
it themselves, was a mistake.
The Herald Sun – Opinion
We will bring this legislation into
parliament before the end of the year. This
Communications
The Prime Minister
is all about supporting parents and
for
protecting children.
We want children to have their childhood - The
Herald Sun | Prime Minister of Australia
(pm.gov.au)
Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)
Instagram will introduce "teen accounts"
Minister
for people under 18, limiting what they can
Anti-bullying features and more parental access
will be part of new Instagram measures for
view and who can contact them.
the
underage users
Meta said the switch will happen
by
immediately for any new users and within
60 days for existing users. Meta is also
developing AI tools to help it detect
1982
underage users who lie about their age. The
tools will be trialled with US users in 2025.
Act
ABC News
Concern that banning young people from social
media could prevent marginalised people from
FOI
finding "life-saving" resources they may not be
As a federal social media ban looms,
able to access offline.
the
marginalised groups fear youth could be cut off
"For a lot of young people, especially people
from their communities - ABC News
who are marginalised, the internet provides
really important spaces for finding
under
communities, and many of the problems that
they experience while doing that are really
deep issues of social media that also affect
adults."
To just say we're going to ban kids from
Released
accessing that social media until they're 14 or
until they're 16, and then chuck them in [with
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
15
Document 9
QB24-000078
ONLINE SAFETY
those adults] doesn't address the root of the
problem."
Crikey
Public debate about Australia’s looming teen
social media ban has naturally focused on
It's not just a 'teen social media ban', it's an age children — but it is going to affect Australians
verification scheme
of all ages.
ABC News
Concern that the ban could be detrimental to
teenagers who rely on social media to connect
Federal government's looming social media ban with marginalised and minority groups.
may be bad for isolated, marginalised
teenagers - ABC News
The Guardian
Norway is to enforce a strict minimum age limit
on social media of 15 as the government
Norway to increase minimum age limit on
ramped up its campaign against tech
Communications
social media to 15 to protect children | Norway companies it says are “pitted against small
| The Guardian
children’s brains”.
for
Courier Mail
Criticism that the technology trial to ensure
social media companies can enforce an age
https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/world/l
limit is yet to begin.
abor-delays-social-media-age-limit-
Minister
trial/video/3e7ab9ee2d4f29be68fc6cf2c748452
c
the
by
Daily Telegraph
The Prime Minister will announce 16 as the
minimum age to access social media.
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new
s/national/anthony-albanese-calls-time-
1982
on-social-media-harms-backs-raising-
minimum-age-to-16/news-
Act
story/272445db8deab9c6ed7764767156
b52c
FOI
the
under
Released
Last edited: 6/11/2024
SES Cleared by: Andrew Irwin
SES cleared on: 6/11/2024
16
Document 10
s22(1)(a)(ii)
From:
VANDENBROEK, Sarah
Sent:
Thursday, 7 November 2024 12:41 PM
To:
s22(1)(a)(ii)
Subject:
Briefing note - Social Media Minimum Age Law - Design Principles.docx [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Attachments:
Briefing note - Social Media Minimum Age Law - Design Principles.docx
OFFICIAL
Hi s22(1)(a)
(ii)
Attached is the briefing note we used for the mental health orgs and the platforms.
I’m proposing that we send it to Premiers’ and Chief Ministers’ Departments to assist with briefing for National
Communications
Cabinet tomorrow.
for
Thanks,
Sarah
Minister
OFFICIAL
the
by
1982
Act
FOI
the
under
Released
