Australia's crackdown on free speech makes Britain look moderate
Following on from its vaunted under-16s social media restriction legislation last year, the Labor government led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is extending the ban to YouTube under the guise of 'protecting children'.
There is a significant body of research that suggests social media is driving a mental health crisis in young people. Cyberbullying is causing children tragically to take their own lives. In fact, Facebook's own internal research, leaked by a whistleblower, concluded that 'Teens blame Instagram for increases in the rate of anxiety and depression … This reaction was unprompted and consistent across all groups.'
However, banning it totally for everyone under 16 amounts to a wrong-headed approach to a problem, a Trojan horse for something much more sinister.
How the legislation is drafted amounts to the creation of a backdoor to controlling the internet, and gives sweeping powers to an unelected bureaucrat – the e-Safety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant – to decide what is 'reasonable' for platforms to collect and enforce.
Inman Grant is the last person to whom any extra power should be given. A US House Judiciary Committee report in June accused her of coordinating with major advertisers and national governments through the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) to 'silence American speech', particularly targeting Right-of-centre viewpoints, suggestions that Grant has denied.
In a speech given to the World Economic Forum in 2022, Inman Grant asserted: 'We're going to have to think about a recalibration of a whole range of human rights that are playing out online, from freedom of speech to the freedom […] to be free from online violence.' Challenged about this afterwards, American-born Inman Grant responded dismissively by stating that 'the First Amendment doesn't apply in Australia.'
Last year, she tried to institute a worldwide ban of video footage of the terrible stabbing attack on Assyrian Christian Bishop Mari Emmanuel while he was giving a sermon to his congregation in a suburban Sydney church, only backing down after an international outcry.
Just a couple of weeks ago, Inman Grant had a significant loss in Australia's Administrative Review Tribunal, when Canadian man Chris Elston (more commonly known as 'Billboard Chris') successfully stopped her from censoring him on X. Her attempts to impose a $782,500 fine on X for alleged 'cyber abuse' were also thrown out.
In handing down its decision, the Tribunal delivered a subtle rebuke to Inman Grant, declaring: 'The role of the Tribunal is not to assess the merits of what the applicant posted, or to agree or disagree with the views he expressed.'
Now, on her recommendation, the Albanese government wants to ban YouTube for kids under 16. This is despite Communications Minister Anika Wells saying back in 2022 that it was a great way to keep her kids entertained.
To enforce this ban, the supposed 'voluntary' digital ID will not be so voluntary after all. Australians will be asked to upload personal documents, submit facial scans, and hand over sensitive data to unaccountable third parties to prove their age.
Thanks to the UK Online Safety Act, we are getting a working demonstration of how, hidden behind the concerns for children's welfare, there is in fact what could be described as a politicised attempt to radically extend government control over platforms which shape social discourse.
The Online Safety Act, designed to supposedly 'protect kids from porn by asking them to prove their age', has been used to censor political discussion by British adults. As noted by the Spectator, the Act 'is not being used to shut down Pornhub or xHamster for adolescents, but to silence discussion – or even basic news – about those topics most awkward for the British government: Pakistani rape gangs, illegal immigration, protests about asylum hotels.'
Seemingly that is how politicians and bureaucrats view social media – as a place to propagate their politics and manipulate voters.
They know that most people under the age of 35 get their information and views not from traditional media, but from social media. Navigating these sites is a matter of parental choice – and parents should not be outsourcing their responsibilities to the government. As it is, the word 'parent' isn't even mentioned once in the Australian social media ban legislation.
If the government really was interested in doing something positive to address social media addiction, it would look at tackling the algorithms, which are often designed to get kids addicted. We have no idea how these algorithms work, what content they promote, or how they are impacting young people.
This ban is less about online safety for kids and more about online safety for the political and bureaucratic class. An unacceptable dystopia awaits Australia in December.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Climate wars are simmering among the NSW Liberals – and they could pose a problem for Mark Speakman
The never-ending war within the Coalition over energy policy and climate targets appears to have infected the New South Wales Liberals, as they struggle to restore the administration of their branch and get traction with voters. It's bad news for the NSW opposition leader, Mark Speakman, whose hold on the leadership is being increasingly questioned. Until now, the main battle ground for the renewed climate wars has been Canberra, where the right of the Liberal party and the Nationals from Queensland – aided and abetted by US president Donald Trump – have used every opportunity to foment discontent. The federal Coalition leader, Sussan Ley, has promised to review the Coalition's energy policy, but there will be no easy answers. She will need to juggle the demands of MPs such as Nationals senator Matt Canavan and Liberal Andrew Hastie that she drop the net zero target, with the views of her city MPs, who know they could go the way of their former colleagues who lost seats to teal independents. Let alone doing the right thing for the planet. For the NSW Coalition, energy policy has been an area of mostly bipartisan agreement – until now. In 2020, the then energy minister Matt Kean, a Liberal who now chairs the Climate Change Authority, released the energy roadmap that showed how NSW would meet its objective to deliver a 70% cut in emissions by 2035 compared to 2005 levels, and net zero by 2050. It was supported by both sides. But last week the first signs of an unravelling emerged. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Just before the NSW parliament rose for a long break, the Liberal MP for Goulburn, Wendy Tuckerman, resigned from the shadow ministry over her own party's failure to listen to her concerns about windfarms. Ostensibly, it was over a failure of the leadership to consult on the electricity infrastructure bill, which the government said was urgent. The bill gave the energy minister, Penny Sharpe, the power to fast-track investments in synchronous condensers, which are urgently needed for grid stability. According to her office, it did no more than broaden the definition of priority infrastructure to ensure investments in this critical infrastructure by the privately owned electricity distributors could proceed. Whether it did more than that depends on who you ask. The Minns government says it doesn't alter the planning and consultation process for major infrastructure such as transmission lines. But it was a bridge too far for Tuckerman, whose electorate is part of a renewable energy zone and has seen dozens of projects proposed. 'I have had countless calls, emails and comments from community members that feel like they have just been kicked while they are down. They are bearing the brunt of poor planning and by the government's lack of accountability. They are not being listened to,' she said. 'I can no longer in good conscience be a part of a process that sidelines the voices of constituents and regional communities, or which undermines my ability to represent the people that put me here.' There's no doubt that Tuckerman's electorate is concerned about the scale of windfarm development – as is the Orana region near Dubbo. But the concerns have been turbocharged and taken to a wider audience by the Daily Telegraph, which has run no fewer than five stories in the space of two weeks about the harm that windfarms were causing farmers in Tuckerman's electorate. These were then amplified across other News Corp platforms including and Sky News, who interviewed the Telegraph journalists about their coverage, and by 2GB. At the same time, the rightwing advocacy group Advance has announced a campaign to kill off 'weakling' Liberals who support the net zero climate target. Advance members are being bombarded with emails seeking donations, with the aim to raise $450,000 before the end of August. Most of Advance's efforts seem focused on the federal Liberals, but the anti-net zero sentiment has reached the NSW Nationals, at least in the grassroots party. At their conference in June in Coffs Harbour, they voted to drop support for net zero. The problem for Speakman is that the climate issue could quickly become a wedge that will be used by the right to further fuel the leadership speculation that is already bubbling. Speakman is undoubtedly under pressure. There's no immediate appetite to replace him, among the dominant moderate faction from which he comes. But there is concern about a lack of cut-through, particularly as a recent Resolve poll in July in the Sydney Morning Herald showed Labor with a commanding primary vote lead over the Coalition of 38% (up five points on the last result in April) to 32% (down four), with the Greens up two to 13%. The Poll Bludger estimated this would imply a two-party Labor lead of at least 57-43, compared with 54.3-45.7 at the March 2023 election. A 5% swing would see the Liberals lose another five seats and condemn them to a further two terms of opposition. 'People are starting to worry about saving the furniture,' one Liberal said. The Kiama byelection on 13 September will be a test for Speakman. If he puts in a good showing, the troops might calm down. But with an election due in March 2027, the window for leadership bloodletting is fast approaching. Both sides were claiming underdog status in the South Coast seat, which was most recently held by the Liberal turned Independent Gareth Ward, who resigned after being convicted of rape. Ward enjoyed enormous personal support even after the charges were laid, so it's difficult to say whether voters will chose to punish the Liberals or follow the conventional wisdom of byelections and give the government of the day a good kick. In the meantime, the climate wars are simmering again and they've reached the doors of Macquarie Street. A NSW parliamentary committee is due to release a report on the renewable energy zones and their impact on rural communities as early as next week. It will provide an opportunity for the opponents of net zero to target more 'weakling' Liberals – and it will test out Speakman's skill in managing a difficult issue for his troops.
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The economic roundtable is Jim Chalmers' chance for bold reform. Australians can't afford anything less
Jim Chalmers had a determined look about him this week, ahead of the government's much-hyped economic reform roundtable in Canberra. The atmosphere in the treasurer's office was reminiscent of the days immediately before a federal budget, with frenetic activity and an air of sleep deprivation among the small army of advisers. Preparations for the three-day event have been exhaustive and Chalmers works at a pace few people in the ministerial wing can sustain. Armed with a small page of handwritten notes, Chalmers told this column that the process of consulting with hundreds of individuals and organisations about how to turn around the country's productivity challenges had been more than worthwhile, as 30-odd attenders prepare to take their seats at the cabinet table on Tuesday morning. There's no doubt new approaches are needed. Productivity has barely grown at all since 2016. The stagnation in the Australian economy poses a threat to living standards, since working smarter is the long-run driver of securing higher incomes for households. Ken Henry, the former Treasury boss and summit invitee, puts the challenge another way. He calculates Australian workers have lost about $500,000 in potential pay rises over the past 25 years because of sclerotic productivity growth. 'I see it as three days to help inform three budgets,' Chalmers said, sitting at a conference table in the office previously occupied by Wayne Swan, his former boss and mentor. Family photos and a curated collection of books about politics and history dominate the space. Conscious of messaging and expectations in Canberra and beyond, Chalmers said outcomes from the roundtable would fuel and inform future decisions of the government, helping set a direction for Labor in this term of parliament an others to come. Solutions to emerging problems such as AI and an ageing population are also badly needed. Sign up: AU Breaking News email The event itself has required more than a little productivity already. Treasury received 900 submissions – twice the number of pitches received before Labor's jobs and skills summit early in the government's first term. Chalmers has held boardroom talks with business leaders and lobby groups, while ministers have convened more than 40 preparatory meetings of their own, attended by about 700 people. The Productivity Commission has released a slew of reports to guide the process. Bureaucrats in Chalmers' department have used AI to organise and structure this massive input of ideas, including the predictable mix of kite flying, influence peddling and ambit claims. On Friday, Chalmers sat down with his state and territory counterparts for the last of these events. Talking up consensus, the group agreed to work towards faster approvals for major infrastructure projects, to cut cumbersome and outdated regulation, to boost competition and build more homes more quickly. Some serious ideas are in the mix, illustrated by an awkwardly timed Treasury leak this week, which showed Labor was preparing to move forward with reforms to clear a backlog of 30,000 housing approvals held up by outdated environmental laws, as well as new rules for AI and a pause on changes to the National Construction Code. 'There's been a heap of effort,' Chalmers said. 'Working around the clock for four weeks to make sure that people's voices are heard and that we can shape up a meaningful and useful roundtable.' The meeting has become an organising tool for Labor's second term, including allowing Chalmers and Albanese to test ideas with voters and the media, and rule some ideas out. The prime minister has also stressed the government won't misjudge its mandate or foist new taxes on the electorate. Overdue ideas already firmly in need of resolution are being attached as well: changes to Howard-era national environmental laws will get a kick along and Anthony Albanese telegraphed this week that road user charging rules for electric vehicles would be thrashed out over the roundtable. Here a phased-in and staged approach is expected, treating heavy vehicles differently to ensure EV take-up continues to grow in line with the renewables transition. Labor might even come away with an idea or two for major reform proposals to take to voters at the next election, putting its thumping victory over Peter Dutton to use. But the lead-up to the summit hasn't all been smooth sailing. It emerged on Wednesday that Chalmers and Albanese had held a face-to-face meeting last week after a reported 'frisson' over expectations for the summit. Albanese appeared frustrated at some mission creep for the talks and the pair discussed the need to 'be on the same page' about major tax reform plans and the scale of Labor's ambition. After the story emerged, both were quick to say they meet all the time, while the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, talked up their cooperation at the heart of the government. Despite not wanting to shut down ideas ahead of the summit, Albanese and Chalmers have rejected calls to change the rate and base of the GST, and ruled out negative gearing and capital gains tax concession rule changes. The Australian Council of Trade Unions called for a four-day week for workers, without any loss of pay, a reform that feels both eminently possible in the future but too ambitious for the present. The Greens want Labor to move faster with expensive plans for universal childcare, an ambition Albanese is laying the groundwork for already, while the Coalition is both taking part in the talks and deriding them as akin to a tour of Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. It is unclear who will play the role of Augustus Gloop in this scenario. Labor can't afford not to be bold. It has identified the productivity problem and told voters it is better placed than the Coalition to manage the economy. Chalmers wants to be remembered as a reforming treasurer, and aspires to higher office, but will need to convince his colleagues – and the sometimes more cautious prime minister – of the case for ambition. Chalmers and Albanese made their own job harder by raising the prospect of sweeping tax reform at the start of the process, only to quickly shut down some of the serious proposals in a bid to manage expectations. The best way to undermine claims that the roundtable is a stage-managed talkfest is to make it a success: to take up real economic reform options that drive growth and boost productivity. Strengthening the budget and lifting living standards is as necessary as it is difficult, but buy-in from roundtable participants will be a crucial start, even if Labor has to spend political capital to get the job done.
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Which way will the wind blow? Decision day looms for planned windfarm on Tasmania's Robbins Island
More people have heard of Robbins Island than have seen it. Separated from Tasmania's north-western tip by a stretch of water that can be navigated only at low tide, the island is nearly 10,000 hectares of heathland and woodlands, paddocks, unusual geology and wetlands, all ringed by pristine beaches. The island has been owned by the Hammond family, who use it to run Wagyu cattle, since the 1960s. Further back it was home to the Pirilyunya people for tens of thousands of years. Its future is contested. After repeated delays, it is expected to be decided by the federal environment minister, Murray Watt, this month. For eight years, the renewable energy company Acen Australia has been planning to make the island home to what would be one of Australia's largest windfarms. If approved, it says, it would spend more than $3bn as it builds up to 100 turbines (maximum height: 212 metres), a 500-metre wharf and a 1.2km bridge. A 120km transmission line through forest and farms across the state's north-west will require a separate approval. Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as a free newsletter Acen says it is one of the best wind energy sites in the country, with the capacity to generate at least a third more electricity than an average windfarm the same size. The turbines would be powered by what the Hammonds have described as the world's cleanest air – the roaring forties, which blow unimpeded across the southern Indian Ocean to the Tasmanian west coast. The proposal is backed by the state's Liberal and Labor parties, and the business community. The head of the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Wayne Davy, says it is 'absolutely essential' to meet growing power demand, and has urged the federal government to approve it to 'create jobs, investment and huge benefits for the Tasmanian economy'. But it is opposed by environmental organisations and some scientists. They agree that the country needs more renewable energy in a hurry to replace ageing coal plants and cut greenhouse gas emissions, but argue the site is wrong. The intertidal mudflats at Robbins Island and in the surrounding area are considered internationally important feeding habitat for migratory and residential shorebirds, including more than 15 species that travel from the northern hemisphere each year via the east Asian-Australasian flyway. Some of these species, including the curlew sandpiper, far-eastern curlew and red knot, are listed as threatened. Some shorebird populations are estimated to have fallen by more than 70% since late last century. Environmentalists say the 720-megawatt farm could also threaten endangered Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagles, the vulnerable blue-winged parrot and the critically endangered orange-bellied parrot, which flies from the Australian mainland to Melaleuca, in the Tasmanian wilderness world heritage area, each summer to breed. The orange-bellied parrot has been the focus of an intensive government-funded recovery effort. Its wild population remains tiny. It fell to just 17 before increasing to nearly 100 last winter. A flock of red knots, a threatened species The question facing Watt is whether the windfarm can be designed in a way that shields these and other threatened species – notably, a disease-free population of Tasmanian devils – that he is required to protect under national environment law. He will be making the decision before a long-promised overhaul of the law, which has few defenders and is widely agreed to be failing. The timing places Robbins Island at the centre of an argument about how to balance the need to preserve Australia's wild places and wildlife, including a ballooning list of species at risk of extinction, while allowing a rapid rollout of renewable energy. Curlew sandpipers and a hooded plover Conservationists argue there are some places development should just not be allowed, and they include Robbins Island. Sean Dooley, a senior adviser at BirdLife Australia, says: 'To us, it is a no-go site.' 'It is such a vital staging post and feeding site for shorebirds – certainly, the most important site in Tasmania,' Dooley says. 'Birdlife Australia sees climate change as one of the two major things that are going to impact and reduce bird populations, and we need to get on top of it as soon as we can. But it's essential, in trying to deal with that, we don't exacerbate the other major threat, which is destroying habitat.' Eric Woehler, an ecologist and former convener of BirdLife Tasmania, describes the proposed site as 'completely inappropriate'. He says the company's bird surveys have been 'fundamentally inadequate', but that the best available orange-bellied parrot data – from radio-tracking of its 2024 northern migration – suggested half the birds that showed up on monitoring had visited Robbins Island. A white-bellied sea eagle 'If this is approved there is a very real and very frightening prospect of the loss of orange-bellied parrots in the wild from collision risk,' he says. 'There is a very great risk to the wedge-tailed eagle population in the area. There is a very great risk to the migratory shorebirds that fly from Siberia to Tasmania to feed in the Robbins passage area every year for six months.' The windfarm has had a difficult path to final decision stage. It has had to clear local and state hurdles, and a federal decision has been delayed seven times. In 2021 Guardian Australia revealed that federal officials had raised concern about the impact on about 150 devils that have been geographically protected from a contagious facial tumour disease that has devastated other populations, had advised the company the impact on the species could be difficult to offset. In 2022 the Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority notionally approved the development, but said it must shut down for five months each year during orange-bellied parrots' migration season. This was widely seen as a decision that would block the development, given the shutdown would make it financially unviable. But the EPA ruling was overturned on appeal. A counter-appeal against the project by the community group Circular Head Coastal Awareness Network lost in the supreme court. Acen says it is confident the risk to birds and devils can be managed and has changed its plans to address concerns that have been raised, including reducing the number of turbines by 20%, carving out part of the northern end of the island from development and promising a 500-metre buffer around sites that shorebirds gather. It says there is no evidence from surveys that shorebirds fly across the island – a point that is strongly disputed by campaigners – and, despite radio-tracking surveys last and this year, that little is known about orange-bellied parrots' flight path or the height at which they travel. Michael Connarty, Acen's head of operations and trading, acknowledges that the length of the development process has been frustrating and says the project has probably been scrutinised as much as any in Tasmania's history. He argues that the development will benefit the local community, including creating up to to 400 jobs in construction and 60 during operation, help power clean industry in the state and send any excess electricity across Bass Strait. Acen hopes Watt approves it with conditions that outline the risks it needs to navigate. 'We believe the risks can be mitigated,' Connarty says. 'It's not like this is like a rubber stamp process over eight years. There has been high-level scrutiny of the project in terms of the risk and mitigations and we're hopeful that it'll be a positive outcome with conditions, and we'll work through whatever those conditions look like.' Dooley says he has some sympathy for Acen's position as it was trying to develop the windfarm 'within the rulebook they have been given'. Birdlife Australia believes the primary issue is nature laws that 'don't give a clear vision of how the renewables rollout should go'. Another environment group, the Bob Brown Foundation, says it is preparing for action. Its founder, the former Greens leader Bob Brown, this week predicted Watt would approve the development, and vowed it would help 'bring on the biggest public confrontation with environmental defenders here since the Franklin dam'. A spokesperson for Watt declined to comment on the project while a decision was being made. They said the government had made clear it intended to reform environmental laws to 'better protect our environment, while delivering more efficient approvals'. A decision is due by 29 August.
