Tuesday 27 October 2026
Two weeks ago, my electoral office received a phone call.
It was a mother in my electorate calling to share her thoughts on the Digital Duty of Care Bill, now before Parliament.
She had an experience she wanted to share.
A few years ago, her daughter was approached online through an online chat platform from people on the other side of the world.
Initially friendly, these people soon turned predatory and dangerous. And I should warn those listening that I'm about to discuss a concerning and distressing situation.
What occurred over the next months was nothing short of harrowing.
This young woman was harassed into taking compromising photos and videos of herself, she was harassed into self-harm, she was manipulated with threats made against her family: and this was all videoed, all for the perverse and sickening benefit of people watching from the other side of the world.
Months after these criminals had started stalking her daughter, one morning the mother received a knock on the door by Police.
Up until this point, she was completely unaware of what had been occurring, nor was she aware that the previous night her daughter had spent many hours on the phone with a Kids Helpline.
The online predators had been pressuring the young woman to commit suicide on a livestream.
When she pushed back, they threatened to harm her family and release the photos and videos that they had previously forced her to take.
Shocked and distressed, her mother took numerous steps to protect her daughter.
She hid devices, slept with them under her pillow, she put all possible restrictions in place that she could think of.
But it wasn’t enough.
These overseas actors continue to manipulate her daughter to evade these restrictions and bypass the mother’s oversight.
‘Once that happened’, the mother recounts, ‘they were able to access my daughter anytime, even when I was sitting right next to her, thinking that she was talking with her friends.’
‘I didn’t know what I was really dealing with’, she went on, ‘and if you don’t know what you’re really dealing with, you cannot help your child.’
Over the next few years, she fought through sleepless nights to keep her daughter safe.
Dealing with authorities, both in Australia and overseas, was extremely difficult due to the multijurisdictional nature of the crimes and the fact that some of the predators were children themselves.
Ultimately, after corresponding with police in our own and other jurisdictions, a measure of justice was done when one of the main perpetrators was sentenced, but it was already too late to save this young woman whose visible and invisible scars will be with her forever.
Meanwhile, on this, the very well known platform that was concerned with these incidents, that had hosted these criminal interactions, they suffered no consequences.
On the phone call to my office, the mother in this situation made an impassioned plea for our government to do more to keep the online environment safe and stated her support for a digital duty of care.
I am deeply grateful for this mother and her brave daughter for sharing their story in order to try and change the law here in Australia to protect others from harm in the future.
Deputy Speaker, the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill establishes a responsibility for online services to ensure a safe online environment in which adults in Australia are protected from seriously harmful material and conduct, and children in Australia are protected from material and conduct that is harmful to children.
This is not simply about people’s algorithms, which we have heard a lot about in the media and public forums.
This is about a broader obligation on tech platforms to make sure that their services are safe and users of their platforms are protected.
Deputy Speaker, it is important to note as part of this debate, which is presently topical in our community, that my office has also spoken with people who are concerned about this Bill.
Their concerns have largely centered around Freedom of Speech, potential Government overreach and parental responsibility.
Freedom of Speech is one of the key pillars of our democracy.
The right to free speech is a right of expression that many Australians hold dear, as do I.
Indeed, the ability to debate, to disagree, to reason, to change minds and move forward is the very foundation of our Parliament, and other democratic parliaments across the world.
Yet this is half the picture, as alongside the right of free speech, comes the responsibility to protect people from serious harm.
In a functioning, respectful and safe society there are limits, and there should be limits, to what we can do and say.
Stopping a predator from trying to convince a young person to harm themselves is not silencing freedom of speech.
Stopping someone from hosting a forum that shares child abuse material or children self-harming is not silencing freedom of speech.
This is immoral behaviour; it is behaviour that reaches a criminal threshold.
Indeed, this Bill is structured so that Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression is upheld to the fullest extent possible.
When it comes to content which will be regulated for adults, the only content that is covered in this bill is content that would otherwise reach a criminal threshold.
Seriously harmful material under this Bill includes:
1 - posting, or threatening to post, an intimate image of another person without the consent of the other person
2 – material or conduct that encourages, promotes, incites or instructs extreme violence or cruelty
And 3 - explicit threats of physical violence, including threats of rape and death threats
I can't imagine that many Australians would justify these examples as citizens exercising their right to free speech – they would rightly identify these examples as harmful content which makes people in our community less safe.
It is worth noting that if our Digital Duty of Care had been in place earlier, the young woman who was so terribly impacted by online predators and criminals in my electorate may have been protected from harm.
The intention of this Bill is to create safer online environments, as well as creating an environment where people can exercise more choice over what they consume online.
Our Government’s initiative – My Feed My Way – is about the right for Australians to consume content that they want to see, not content that is controlled by an algorithm and fed to them.
We want to give Australians more choice over what they consume on social media and tech platforms – and Australians will have the power to make this decision – it will not be forced upon them.
With people’s attention now being fought over and commercialised, and their time online something that tech companies want to maintain and harness, My Feed My Way will provide a greater level of choice.
If you want the algorithm to feed you suggested content, and if you want to get lost in Facebook Reels until the early hours of the morning – this bill will not stop you.
On the other hand, if you only want to see content from your family, friends and those that you follow, guarding your attention and taking back control, then that power could be yours.
One of the other issues that has been raised regarding this Bill is that it should be up to the parents to control what their kids can see and do online.
If anyone can find some children or teenagers to do everything their parents say, then please do make yourself known.
It is increasingly challenging for parents to control what their children see online.
Our Government is working hard to put that control as much as possible back into the hands of parents.
As seen by the example of the young woman in my electorate, online predators can coach young people on how to get around parental controls while online platforms will keep supplying access even when a parent says no, leaving children completely exposed and unprotected.
To repeat the words of the mother that reached out to my office - ‘if you don’t know what you’re really dealing with, you cannot help your child.’
Deputy Speaker, what we need are guardrails and rules that set boundaries for our kids and how they interact with each other and the world in a safe environment.
This bill does just that.
For children under 16, platforms must protect them from content that is harmful.
The Bill provides a list of material that is harmful to children including:
Pornography,
Material or conduct that encourages, promotes or instructs disordered eating,
Material or conduct that encourages or promotes hostile attitudes towards women or gender equality,
Material or conduct that glorifies crime or encourages dangerous stunts or seriously harmful practices; and
Abuse, harassment or bullying.
Parents cannot monitor every interaction, understand every algorithm, or anticipate every danger hidden within platforms designed by some of the world's most sophisticated technology companies.
Nor should they have to compete with systems deliberately engineered to capture attention, encourage prolonged engagement and keep users coming back.
We would never expect parents to make a dangerous playground safe by simply watching their children more closely.
We would expect those responsible for that playground to take reasonable steps to eliminate or reduce foreseeable dangers and risks.
There is no reason for an online platform to be any different.
Some people have expressed concerns that this Bill is an example of Government overreach.
Some people are concerned that this bill represents an expansion of Government power and that the tough penalties that this bill legislates will make tech companies overreact, censor what would otherwise be lawful and harmless activity, and restrict the online environment.
For decades, our society has accepted that businesses have responsibilities to the people who use and are affected by their products and services.
We expect reasonable safety standards in workplaces, schools, consumer products and public spaces.
When we go to the supermarket, we expect the food we eat will be safe.
When we buy a car, we expect the brakes to work.
When we engage a builder, we expect our homes to be safe.
When we purchase a game, or a toy for our children we expect it to be safe.
The same should be true of big tech.
Technology companies have acquired extraordinary influence over how we communicate, access information, form relationships and understand our communities.
Their platforms are not merely passive conduits. Their algorithms, design features, and commercial incentives shape what we see and how long we remain engaged.
With that influence comes a responsibility to identify and address foreseeable dangers and risks.
This is not an argument against technological innovation, nor is it a demand that digital platforms eliminate every conceivable risk.
It is an argument for a reasonable and proportionate standard of care, commensurate with the power these companies exercise and the potential consequences of their online products.
We should not accept that a company can profit from the design of a digital environment while treating the resulting harms as someone else's problem.
Nor should the burden of managing those risks fall disproportionately upon children, families and individuals who have neither the resources nor the capacity to control the systems they use.
The Digital Duty of Care Bill represents an important step towards correcting that imbalance.
We regulate other industries to ensure that their products and services are safe.
It’s expected, it’s accepted and it works.
Deputy Speaker, the overarching premise of this bill is prevention not punishment.
We want to stop harms from happening in the first place.
We want to stop children and young people from being coerced into self-harm or seeing harmful material.
We want to stop parents fearing for their child’s safety from predators on the other side of the globe.
We want to stop people across the country from being exposed to illegal and seriously harmful conduct.
And we want to give people back control over their attention.
Deputy Speaker, this bill strikes an important balance.
Now is the time for tech platforms to play by fair rules and for them to respond – and to properly respond - to community concerns.
Now is the time to stop saying that this problem is too hard and that the internet can’t be regulated.
Now is the time that we stand up for Australian families against the worst excesses of online platforms to protect our kids from online harms, and show that as a society, yes, we can be better, and we will be better.
I commend this bill to the house.
Thank you, Deputy Speaker.
[End]