corner
  • Limited scrutiny: The Age Assurance trial report is complex and difficult for ordinary Australians to examine. Parliament and the public still lack the clarity needed to weigh the risks and limitations.
  • Lack of democratic process: The bill was rushed through Parliament with minimal debate and almost no time for consultation. That’s not how democracy should work.
  • Unproven technology: No age-verification system has been publicly trialled or independently audited. Even government advisors raised red flags about privacy and procedure.
  • Privacy risks: Mandated ID checks or biometric scans could create dangerous new databases of children’s personal data, open to surveillance or breaches.
  • Excluding vulnerable youth: Migrant, regional, and disabled young people who rely on online communities for learning and support would be disproportionately cut off.
  • Suppressed innovation: Many teenagers use platforms like YouTube or TikTok to learn, create, and even start small businesses. This law cuts them off from opportunity.
  • Human rights concerns: The ban interferes with young people’s rights to free expression, information, and participation in cultural and educational life.

We urge the Australian Government to repeal the U16 Social Media Ban unless:

  • Age-verification systems are publicly trialled, independently audited, and proven safe.
  • A thorough consultation is held with young people, families, educators, health and legal experts, and digital rights advocates.
  • Policy is refocused on:
    • Safety-by-design standards and stronger media literacy programs.
    • Recognising the role of social media in education, creativity, and entrepreneurship.
    • A statutory duty of care for platforms to protect youth—without punishing children.

If the law cannot meet basic standards of privacy, equity, and practicality, the government must commit to repeal.

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 was rushed through Parliament before Australians had the chance to see the results of the government’s own trials. The final report of the Age Assurance Technology Trials, released on 1 September 2025, showed what many feared: every method tested came with serious problems. Not one system proved reliable. Privacy, accessibility, and practical implementation all remain unresolved.

Yet despite these findings, the law is already on the books. Submissions to the Senate inquiry closed on 22 September — just one day was offered to the public. Fifteen thousand Australians spoke up, but the government passed the bill the very next day. This process was fast-tracked at the expense of democratic accountability.

What does the law actually do? It bans anyone under 16 from creating or maintaining a social media account — but the only way to enforce this ban is to require age assurance checks on every single user, young and old. That means Australians will be asked to hand over sensitive information — IDs, facial scans, or behavioural data — just to keep accessing platforms we already use. Parents, families, and even adults with long-held accounts will be forced into the same system of verification.

This isn’t just about “keeping kids off TikTok.” It’s about building an infrastructure of mass identification and surveillance under the guise of child safety. Until there is transparent scrutiny and independent testing, enforcing this law risks harming children’s rights, family privacy, and our digital freedom.

Australians deserve laws made in the open, not rushed behind closed doors.

Please add your name if you agree: it’s time to repeal the U16 Social Media Ban unless it can be done properly, fairly, and transparently.

The Right to Connect: A People’s Appeal

Demand Representation. Hold Our Leaders Accountable. Your Voice is Crucial.

The People’s Letter to the Hon Anika Wells MP
Minister for Communications
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Attention: Hon Anika Wells MP

Dear Minister Wells,

We, the undersigned citizens of Australia, wish to express our deep concern regarding the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024. This legislation was enacted before the findings of the government’s own Age Assurance Technology Trials were made public. When those results were finally released on 1 September 2025, they confirmed that none of the systems tested could deliver results that were reliable, accurate, or protective of individual privacy.

Despite these clear warnings, the law is now set to take effect. This sequence of events raises serious concerns about government transparency, accountability, and respect for democratic process.

Lack of Public Understanding and Oversight

While the final Age Assurance Technology Trial report has been released, much of its technical detail remains complex and inaccessible to both the public and Parliament. Australians have not been given a fair opportunity to understand how this law will operate, what data will be collected, or who will ultimately control it.

The Senate inquiry into this legislation allowed only a single day for public submissions. In that short window, more than 15,000 Australians voiced their concerns — yet the Bill was passed the very next day, without meaningful parliamentary debate.

This is not the level of consultation Australians expect from a government that claims to act in the public interest.

Expanding Powers, Limited Accountability

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 grants the eSafety Commissioner broad new powers that are neither clearly defined nor subject to sufficient oversight. The Commissioner now holds the authority to determine, approve, and enforce age assurance systems that will affect every Australian who uses social media.

These sweeping powers are vested in an unelected office with limited public accountability. Allowing a single regulator to control digital access, family privacy, and business operations — without clear boundaries or independent review — sets a dangerous precedent for how authority is exercised in the online environment.

This concentration of power has been accompanied by rapid budget growth. The eSafety Commissioner’s annual funding has risen sharply, from approximately $45 million in 2021–22 to more than $150 million in the current forward estimates, with further increases planned. Despite this expansion, there remains little transparent reporting on how these funds are used, how success is measured, or whether this expenditure has delivered genuine safety improvements for Australian families.

Australians have a right to know how public money is being spent — especially when the outcomes appear to involve increased surveillance, reduced privacy, and legislation that restricts participation rather than protects it.

Risks of the Current Approach

  • Privacy and data security – Age assurance systems may require users to upload identification or undergo facial scans, exposing children and families to heightened risks of surveillance, misuse, and data breaches.
  • Inequality and exclusion – Young people in regional areas, migrant families, and those living with disability often rely on online platforms for education, connection, and support. A blanket ban risks cutting many of them off from vital networks.
  • Impact on innovation – Platforms such as YouTube and TikTok have become key spaces for learning, creativity, and small business growth. Restricting access for those under 16 limits opportunity, expression, and economic participation.
  • Rushed decision-making – The legislation was passed before the supporting technologies were adequately tested, reviewed, or debated, undermining confidence in both the policy and its implementation.

What Australians Are Asking For

We, the people of Australia, call on the Minister to:

  • Pause implementation of the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 until it has been independently reviewed, publicly tested, and its impacts fully understood.
  • Commission an independent audit of all age assurance technologies to ensure they meet the highest standards of privacy, accuracy, transparency, and fairness.
  • Place the eSafety Commissioner’s expanded powers and spending under proper parliamentary oversight to guarantee accountability and prevent regulatory overreach.
  • Undertake genuine public consultation with families, educators, young people, industry representatives, and digital rights experts before enforcing further online restrictions.
  • Refocus online safety policy on education, digital literacy, and safety-by-design — not surveillance, exclusion, or blanket bans.

A Smarter, Fairer Approach

Australians want young people to be safe online — but we also want to safeguard privacy, opportunity, and freedom. True safety is built through education, transparency, and accountability — not through rushed laws or unchecked authority.

We therefore call on the government to uphold these principles and ensure that future online safety measures reflect the values Australians hold dear: fairness, inclusion, and respect for personal rights.

If, after these requests are met, the eSafety Commissioner cannot demonstrate that the current framework delivers safe, private, and effective outcomes, the legislation must be repealed in full.

Signed,
The undersigned citizens of Australia

For further information or enquires visit www.standupnowaustralia.com.au