← Back to home Browse all bills

Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm)

Current status

This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.

Policy area

Transport & communications

What does this bill do?

Australia’s communications ministerThe minister this bill would place in charge of running the trial and publishing progress reports. would have to run a trial of age-checking technology aimed at protecting children from online harm, especially pornography.

Why was it introduced?

The government rejected the eSafety Commissioner'sAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. recommended trial of age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service., leaving no real-world test to reduce children's access to harmful online material such as pornography. This bill requires the minister to run that trial, extend it to other uses like wageringBetting or gambling, included here because the bill says the age-check trial could also be used for online betting services., alcohol sales and social media age limits, and report progress to ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses. every six months.

Broader context

A 2020 parliamentary report on protecting children online led the Coalition government to ask the eSafety CommissionerAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. in 2021 to examine age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online., and after a two-year process the commissioner’s roadmap recommended a pilot of age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. to stop children reaching online pornography and test other age-restricted uses. When the government responded in August 2023 by rejecting that trial and opting to pursue industry codesRules written by industry itself that the government said it would use instead of the trial this bill wanted. instead, this bill was introduced to force a minister-run trial, extend it to areas like wageringBetting or gambling, included here because the bill says the age-check trial could also be used for online betting services., alcohol sales and social media age limits, and require six-monthly reports to ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses., but it later lapsed from the Notice PaperThe list of business Parliament plans to deal with; if a bill is removed from it, the bill has effectively stopped moving forward..

Key criticism

No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far, and the available debate material instead argues the trial should happen sooner to test age-assurance tools for harmful online content. in publicly available sources provided, no party represented in the debate opposed the bill, so any criticism is better understood as a limited gap in recorded objections rather than settled agreement on every implementation detail.

Who supported it?

David Coleman MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Liberal Party, LNP.

Introduced in House 27 Nov 2023
Failed in House 13 Aug 2024
Did not reach Senate —
Did not become law —

Did it become law?

No

The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.

Final passage

No final passage

The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.

Time before failure

260 days

From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding

Official record

View on APH

Parliament of Australia bill page

Meaning

What does this bill do?

  1. Australia’s communications ministerThe minister this bill would place in charge of running the trial and publishing progress reports. would have to run a trial of age-checking technology aimed at protecting children from online harm, especially pornography.

  2. The bill would test technology designed to reduce children’s access to inappropriate material online, rather than leaving that question to theory alone.

  3. The trial would not be limited to pornography and could also cover online betting, online alcohol sales, and setting a minimum age for social media use.

  4. The communications ministerThe minister this bill would place in charge of running the trial and publishing progress reports. would have to publish progress reports every six months until the trial ends, giving ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses. regular updates.

  5. Each progress report would also have to be formally tabled in both houses of ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses. within 15 sitting daysThe days when Parliament is actually meeting; the bill uses this measure for deadlines to table reports. after the minister receives it.

Show source excerpts
  1. The purpose of the Bill is to require the Minister to conduct a trial of age verification technologies as a way of protecting children from online harms such as pornography.
    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum
  2. The Commissioner recommended that the Government conduct a trial of “age assurance” technologies. Age assurance technology is designed to reduce the incidences of children accessing inappropriate material online.
    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum
  3. (2) Without limiting this recommendation, the trial is to be conducted to allow for multiple use cases, including online wagering, online alcohol sales and establishing a minimum age for using a social media service.
    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum
  4. (3) The Minister must cause to be prepared a written report on the progress of the trial every 6 months after the commencement of this section until the trial is complete.
    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum
  5. (4) The Minister must cause copies of each report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the day on which the report is given to the Minister.
    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum

Context

Broader context for this bill

A 2020 parliamentary report on protecting children online led the Coalition government to ask the eSafety CommissionerAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. in 2021 to examine age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online., and after a two-year process the commissioner’s roadmap recommended a pilot of age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. to stop children reaching online pornography and test other age-restricted uses. When the government responded in August 2023 by rejecting that trial and opting to pursue industry codesRules written by industry itself that the government said it would use instead of the trial this bill wanted. instead, this bill was introduced to force a minister-run trial, extend it to areas like wageringBetting or gambling, included here because the bill says the age-check trial could also be used for online betting services., alcohol sales and social media age limits, and require six-monthly reports to ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses., but it later lapsed from the Notice PaperThe list of business Parliament plans to deal with; if a bill is removed from it, the bill has effectively stopped moving forward..

  1. 2020

    Parliamentary report calls for action to protect children online

    The House of Representatives reportThe parliamentary committee whose 2020 report helped start the review process that later led to the age-checking roadmap. Protecting the Age of Innocence became the formal trigger for later work on age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online. and child safety online.

    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum ↗
  2. 2021

    Government asks the eSafety CommissionerAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. to examine age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online.

    The former Coalition government referred the issue to the eSafety CommissionerAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run., starting the review process that later produced the recommended trial.

    Second reading speech ↗
  3. March 2023

    eSafety roadmap recommends a trial of age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service.

    The commissioner’s roadmap recommended the government develop, run and evaluate a pilot before mandating age assuranceTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. for access to online pornography.

    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum ↗
  4. August 2023

    Government rejects the recommended trial and backs industry codesRules written by industry itself that the government said it would use instead of the trial this bill wanted. instead

    According to the explanatory memorandum, the government rejected the roadmap’s trial recommendation and said it would develop industry codesRules written by industry itself that the government said it would use instead of the trial this bill wanted. to deal with the issue.

    Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) explanatory memorandum ↗
  5. 27 Nov 2023

    Bill introduced to require a minister-run trial and regular reports

    The bill was introduced to compel a trial of age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. across pornography and other uses such as wageringBetting or gambling, included here because the bill says the age-check trial could also be used for online betting services., alcohol sales and social media age limits, with progress reports every six months tabled in ParliamentThe federal lawmaking body that would receive the minister's progress reports in both houses..

    Hansard ↗
  6. 13 Aug 2024

    Bill is removed from the Notice PaperThe list of business Parliament plans to deal with; if a bill is removed from it, the bill has effectively stopped moving forward.

    The bill was removed from the Notice PaperThe list of business Parliament plans to deal with; if a bill is removed from it, the bill has effectively stopped moving forward. under standing order 42, ending its recorded progress without the proposed trial requirement becoming law.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

Legislative route

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 27 Nov 2023

The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.

Introduced and read a first time

Second reading opened 27 Nov 2023

A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.

Second reading moved

Removed from the Notice PaperThe list of business Parliament plans to deal with; if a bill is removed from it, the bill has effectively stopped moving forward. in accordance with (SO 42) 13 Aug 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Key criticism

The main case against this bill

No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far, and the available debate material instead argues the trial should happen sooner to test age-assurance tools for harmful online content. in publicly available sources provided, no party represented in the debate opposed the bill, so any criticism is better understood as a limited gap in recorded objections rather than settled agreement on every implementation detail.

No significant public case against the bill is recorded so far.

Votes

Recorded votes

No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.

Parliamentary debate

Who spoke, and what they said

Start here — lead voices

Sponsor speech Supports

David Coleman

Liberal Party • MP 27 Nov 2023

Coleman strongly supports the bill because he says it would force the minister to follow the eSafety Commissioner'sAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. recommendation and trial age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. to keep children away from online pornography.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead voice Supports

Andrew Wallace

Liberal National Party • MP 27 Nov 2023

Wallace supports the bill and says age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online. should be introduced to protect young Australians from online pornography and its harms.

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Coalition

2 speakers · 2 support

  1. David Coleman ★ Coleman strongly supports the bill because he says it would force the minister to follow the eSafety Commissioner'sAustralia's online safety regulator, which reviewed age-checking options and recommended a trial that this bill tries to force the government to run. recommendation and trial age assurance technologyTechnology used to estimate or confirm whether a user is old enough to see restricted online content or use a restricted service. to keep children away from online pornography.
    “The parliament should support this bill because this bill forces the minister to take action. The minister, for whatever reason, hasn't wanted to take action. This bill says, 'You have to.' It says: 'Like it or not, you've got to get on with it. You've got to do what the eSafety Commissioner wants you to do and what all of these very eminent experts want you to do and conduct this very important technology trial.' That's why this bill should be supported. It's incredibly important. This is one of the defining issues of our era—the way we respond to issues of child safety online. I strongly commend this bill to the House. I have a little time left which I want to cede to the member for Fisher, who was the chair of the original inquiry that started this process in 2020.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 27 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Andrew Wallace ★ Wallace supports the bill and says age verificationA stricter form of age checking that tries to confirm a person's age before letting them access something online. should be introduced to protect young Australians from online pornography and its harms.
    “Yes. I support this private member's bill, the Online Safety Amendment (Protecting Australian Children from Online Harm) Bill 2023, which has been raised. I'll just comment on your leadership as a member of that committee, Mr Deputy Speaker Freelander, and the leadership of the member for Newcastle, who was my deputy chair during that inquiry. Our committee spoke as one. Age verification needs to be introduced in Australia. There is absolutely no justification in Australia to allow big porn to be impacting upon the lives of young people in Australia today. I know you support it, Mr Deputy Speaker. I know the member for Newcastle supports it. In fact, every member on that committee supported the introduction of age verification.”

    Liberal National Party • MP • 27 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Record

Full record

Full chat