Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. What impact would the government's proposed controls on trolls on social media have on the reported online activities of the member for Bowman?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question may have asked for a legal opinion, Mr Speaker, and I will leave that within your ambit and your guidance. I can tell you what our laws do, and I note the jeers and the sneers that have come against government speakers who have been speaking on this matter, including the Minister representing the Minister for Women. We believe this is a very serious issue. We believe this is an incredibly serious issue. I doubt there's a parent in this country who does not on a nightly basis have concerns about what their children are being exposed to online and the abuse and harassment that can take place. I know I feel that way as a parent, I know Jenny does, and I would think that every single parent in this place would. So this is a serious piece of legislation that the government is bringing forward.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, it's on direct relevance. The points that the Prime Minister is making now are points that the House would agree with, but they are not relevant to the question. The question goes to the behaviour of one of the members of his own government and what impact the legislation will have there. There's no objection to what the Prime Minister is saying, but it's not relevant to this question.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar is not being helpful. I'm happy to hear from the Leader of the House on this point of order.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, clearly the legislation proposed by the government has equal applicability and applies to all Australians equally. For the legal opinion that is being sought by the honourable member opposite, there can be no expectation that the Prime Minister can offer an opinion on a particular matter. Therefore, Mr Speaker, I think the point of order made by the honourable member opposite is in fact not in order and the Prime Minister is relevantly answering a wideranging question and he is completely in order.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question does go to the impact of the policy in relation to specifically the member for Bowman, which in effect does call for a legal opinion. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just to that point of order regarding a legal opinion, I'd refer you to page 558 of Practice, where it deals with legal opinions. It refers to the interpretation of a statute or an international document. It does not refer to proposed legislation.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business is quite right about that point. However, the question also calls for a matter of opinion. It may not necessarily be a legal opinion because it's not a bill, but it is still asking for an opinion as to what impact or what effect the policy would have specifically in relation to the member for Bowman. I'll allow the Prime Minister to continue his answer.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The legislation we'll be bringing forward means that everybody should identify themselves online when they're making statements or making posts so they can be accountable for that. It will apply right across the country. Where the social media companies do not identify that individual, they will be identified as the publisher. That is what our bill does. That is what our proposed remedy is. It builds on the world-leading Online Safety Act and the work that is being done to combat the use of the internet by terrorists. It builds on the work being done by the world's ever first eSafety Commissioner. All of the work we're doing here is to stand up for Australians who are at risk in the online environment. Those who are most at risk are our young people and our women.

I would hope that this would have bipartisan support. I would call for it to have bipartisan support and not be used in the typical political game playing that we get from the opposition. This is a very serious issue, and I would have thought the Labor Party would have been only too quick to support it. But that doesn't seem to be the case by the jeers and the interjections we've had on this matter today.

Andrew Wallace (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business stated that a legal opinion doesn't apply unless it's a statute. Well, it goes further than that. It says:

Legal opinions, such as the interpretation of a statute, or of an international document, or of a Minister's own powers, should not be sought in questions.

So it is further than just that in relation to legislation.