David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to briefly take note of the report. I really want to thank my colleague Senator Hanson-Young for her work in doing what she, the Greens and the Senate can do in holding these big platforms to account.

Let's be clear about what a social media age ban means. It's an age-monitoring plan for everyone, whether you're 13, 15, 40 or 60. It's likely to be achieved by monitoring keystrokes, scanning faces and watching your hand movements. It will result in systemic privacy invasion of everyone, and for what? The government can't even tell us what the harm that they're targeting here is. If the harm is excessive screen time—and we know that that's harmful—then why aren't games and Netflix considered? If the harm is bullying—and we know that can be harmful online as well—then why on earth are messaging apps exempt from it?

The truth is this entire policy is a thought bubble from a government that's unwilling to have the hard conversations about making these online places safe; regulating big tech so that kids are safe; and educating young people and their parents on how to manage risk online, how to think critically about online content and how to set sensible boundaries based on evidence. Labor and the coalition, it seems, have given up on any kind of push towards digital literacy. No doubt it's because groups like—I don't know; let's name one at random—News Corp and the Murdoch media empire are pushing for this attack.

The government say they're spoken to parents about it, but what about the kids and teens who are actually going to cop the ban? What's their say? They have been completely silenced by both the coalition and the Albanese government. In fact, social media is where young people are getting their news. It's where they're rallying for change and building communities. They need tools to interrogate what they see and hear, and they need platforms that are designed to be safe, not just some 21st century prohibition pretending that the internet doesn't exist.

Does the Prime Minister want to explain what his government's plan is for a 16-year-old who has been banned from social media when they're 13, 14 or 15 and then is just launched into this same, unregulated, toxic space when they become 16? What's the plan, Prime Minister? What's your plan? There is none. It's a thought bubble.

The Albanese government might not like what young people have to say and they may want to silence their voices, but the Greens say that young people actually have a right to be seen and heard, including in this debate. Young people have a right to engage in public spaces, and, increasingly, for young people, that's online public spaces, which should be safe. If the government really wanted to look out for young people, they wouldn't say, 'Go and get a VPN and engage in an unregulated social media site as though you're doing it from San Francisco.' What they would say is that they're here to look out for young people and that they'll hold social media giants accountable for online safety. They will insist upon transparency in the algorithms, prevent kids' data being tracked and prevent them being targeted with advertisements from tech platforms that just want to commercialise the data that they rip off kids. And they would make the space safe.

What if they really wanted to make kids safe? Of course they'd take action on climate change and they'd address the housing and the cost-of-living crises. If this government were serious about looking out for young people, they'd start by listening to them. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.