‘A step too far': Albanese government's YouTube age ban blasted
'YouTube might be a step too far, rather than a form of social media, it's a massive platform now for television viewing, and increasingly so,' Mr Kenny said.
'Kids use it for education and information, watching documentaries and interviews and lectures, as well as, of course, for entertainment and sport.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
20 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese now has time to bring real change. So timing becomes critical
In the first session of question time this term, Anthony Albanese was asked whether the government was considering certain taxes. A small smile appeared briefly on the prime minister's face as he stepped up to deliver his answer. Then it vanished and he delivered his line, quiet and clear: 'I'll give a big tip to the member for Fairfax: the time to run a scare campaign is just before an election, not after one.' It was a good line. The quiet confidence with which it was delivered left no doubt as to the government's ascendancy. It helped that, as others have noted, Albanese was right. The opposition's attempts to warn of new taxes fell flat. Most voters have just made their decision – based in part on what the government said it would do – and they aren't yet interested in speculations as to what it might do. But Albanese's words contain a lesson for the government too. The prime minister was talking about a specific type of scare campaign – the rule-in-rule-out kind – where the subject is imagined dangers. But the lesson applies to scare campaigns of any stripe, including those about the impact of actual policies. A scare campaign won't work for a while now. This raises a question: what is the optimal timing in which the government might announce significant reform and make the case for it, safe in the knowledge that apocalyptic warnings will fall on deaf ears? A clue as to the government's thinking might lie in the lessons of its first term. Most prime ministers get into habits. They find things that work and repeat them. The first year of the Albanese government was about setting a tone by delivering on election promises. That is what Albanese has said about the first year of this term, too. Most of the last year was about getting election-ready: troublesome policies sidelined, retail politics to the fore. No doubt that will be repeated. This leaves the difficult middle: the period in which the trickiest feats were attempted. That second year was dominated by the campaign for the Indigenous voice to parliament and then by Albanese's decision to break a promise and change Scott Morrison's stage 3 tax cuts. The fact those feats were attempted in the second year meant two things. First, that if the political impacts were bad for the government – frustration at a referendum loss, anger at a broken promise – there was another year in which those feelings might fade. (Though criticism of the government at the weekend's Garma Festival reminds us that the real impacts of the referendum loss will be felt for years; political impact is not the same thing as actual impact.) Loading Just as significant was the fact that Albanese waited. For the tax cuts, this meant that the pressure built. Withstanding such pressure can be difficult, but it can also be immensely helpful: by the time a government acts, it can feel almost inevitable. Then there was a final element of timing. The debate over those tax cuts had been going on for years before Albanese was elected. Pressure for change had been building all that time, not just for the period Labor was in government.
The Age
20 minutes ago
- The Age
Albanese now has time to bring real change. So timing becomes critical
In the first session of question time this term, Anthony Albanese was asked whether the government was considering certain taxes. A small smile appeared briefly on the prime minister's face as he stepped up to deliver his answer. Then it vanished and he delivered his line, quiet and clear: 'I'll give a big tip to the member for Fairfax: the time to run a scare campaign is just before an election, not after one.' It was a good line. The quiet confidence with which it was delivered left no doubt as to the government's ascendancy. It helped that, as others have noted, Albanese was right. The opposition's attempts to warn of new taxes fell flat. Most voters have just made their decision – based in part on what the government said it would do – and they aren't yet interested in speculations as to what it might do. But Albanese's words contain a lesson for the government too. The prime minister was talking about a specific type of scare campaign – the rule-in-rule-out kind – where the subject is imagined dangers. But the lesson applies to scare campaigns of any stripe, including those about the impact of actual policies. A scare campaign won't work for a while now. This raises a question: what is the optimal timing in which the government might announce significant reform and make the case for it, safe in the knowledge that apocalyptic warnings will fall on deaf ears? A clue as to the government's thinking might lie in the lessons of its first term. Most prime ministers get into habits. They find things that work and repeat them. The first year of the Albanese government was about setting a tone by delivering on election promises. That is what Albanese has said about the first year of this term, too. Most of the last year was about getting election-ready: troublesome policies sidelined, retail politics to the fore. No doubt that will be repeated. This leaves the difficult middle: the period in which the trickiest feats were attempted. That second year was dominated by the campaign for the Indigenous voice to parliament and then by Albanese's decision to break a promise and change Scott Morrison's stage 3 tax cuts. The fact those feats were attempted in the second year meant two things. First, that if the political impacts were bad for the government – frustration at a referendum loss, anger at a broken promise – there was another year in which those feelings might fade. (Though criticism of the government at the weekend's Garma Festival reminds us that the real impacts of the referendum loss will be felt for years; political impact is not the same thing as actual impact.) Loading Just as significant was the fact that Albanese waited. For the tax cuts, this meant that the pressure built. Withstanding such pressure can be difficult, but it can also be immensely helpful: by the time a government acts, it can feel almost inevitable. Then there was a final element of timing. The debate over those tax cuts had been going on for years before Albanese was elected. Pressure for change had been building all that time, not just for the period Labor was in government.
Sky News AU
20 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Labor told 'implied carbon prices', fixing broken renewables approvals key to lowering emissions in Productivity Commission report
A new report from the Productivity Commission has called on Labor to introduce reforms which would produce a similar effect to an "enduring, national carbon price". The interim report, titled: "Investing in cheaper, cleaner energy and the net zero transformation", is part of a series requested by Treasurer Jim Chalmers ahead of the Albanese government's economic roundtable. In it, the Productivity Commission warns the government must move to address "the gaps and overlaps in emissions reduction incentives, speed up approvals for clean energy infrastructure, and create a resilience-rating system for all housing to meet our clean energy targets and adapt to climate change". By doing so, the report says Labor will be able to both lower the cost of cutting emissions, while also maximising the opportunities presented by the energy transition to boost the economy. The Commission places heavy emphasis on a market-based approach, arguing both the Renewable Energy Target and the Capacity Investment Scheme, both central to Labor's net zero agenda, be scrapped in favour of direct incentives in the electricity sector. It also calls for the creation of a new independent agency which would determine a set of "carbon values" against which all emissions reduction policies would be assessed. The agency would set "carbon values" based on the "implied carbon prices" needed to meet Australia's emissions. By doing so, the Commission argues Australia could meet its internationally agreed climate targets at the lowest possible cost. "Our recommendations align with many of the benefits conferred by a broad-based, enduring, national carbon price – a policy that many, including the PC, have consistently argued for," the report said. In addition to factoring in the price of carbon while assessing emissions reduction plans, the report also calls for major reforms to the approval process for renewables projects. "We need to build a large amount of clean energy infrastructure to meet climate targets and ensure reliable and affordable energy supply. But our sluggish and uncertain approval processes are not up to the task," Commissioner Martin Stokie said. "Getting to yes or no quicker on priority projects would meaningfully speed up the clean energy transition." The Commission argues for substantive changes to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, including the introduction of national environmental standards, improved regional planning and clear rules about engaging with local communities and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It also recommends the appointment of an independent Clean Energy Coordinator-General to work across government and break through roadblocks, as well as the creation of a "strike team" to rapidly asses priority projects. Other recommendations included in the report include an increase to the number of facilities covered by Labor's emissions reduction program for industry, the Safeguard Mechanism, and the abolishment of a fringe benefits tax exemption for electric vehicles.
