Craig Kelly (Hughes, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, I seek the call.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the amendment be disagreed to and I call the honourable member for Hughes.

Examples would be if the provider prohibits, restricts or prevents the posting of proceedings by a member or, if a member posts proceedings, the provider removes the post, other than at the initiative of the member; restricts access to the post, by means of shadow banning; encourages or requires the member to remove the post; victimises the member because of the post, including by means of banning, shadow banning, suspending or deplatforming the member or supressing posts of the member; prohibits, restricts or prevents the reposting of any post by a person; or if the end user reposts a post to which the paragraph applies.

This amendment guarantees the freedom of speech in this parliament. It says that this parliament stands supreme above the tech giants. It goes to the traditions of the UK parliament back in the 1600s, where they said specifically that the parliament has primary place over the King of England. The King of England could not censor the proceedings of the parliament back in the 1600s. YouTube, Facebook, TikTok, and Twitter should not be able to do the same thing today.

I hope that other members see the importance of this. As I've said, this is not just about me. This is about the integrity and the primacy of the Australian parliament and the Australian people over these social media giants to prevent them putting undue influence on our parliament and our Australian elections. I hope it has the support of many members of the House.

See this speech in context