Key admission in social media ban update
The brains tasked with finding a way to enforce Labor's world-leading social media ban for under 16s say it is possible but that there is no 'silver bullet'.
The preliminary findings of the Age Assurance Technology Trial (AATT) were released on Friday just six months before the ban was set to come into force.
Project chief Tony Allen said his team found 'there isn't a one solution fits all' but rather a range of options that parties could use. The brains tasked with finding a way to enforce Labor's social media ban for under 16s say it's possible. NewsWire / Aaron Francis Credit: News Corp Australia
'There isn't like a silver bullet that will solve everything,' Mr Allen told Sky News.
'And different providers of social media services, for instance, will need to explore exactly what will work for them and their users, and that's really for them to assess their risk and to consider what they might want to implement.'
In terms of what it might look like in practice, he suggested 'successive validated' – a series of tests designed to firm up a user's age.
Mr Allen said it could start with 'something which is fairly simple, like holding your hand up or showing your face or talking'.
'And then that might not give you sufficient level of confidence, so then move on to maybe age inference techniques, or ultimately, they may need to move on to age verification where you need some sort of record or document,' he said.
The trial uncovered some challenges.
It found parental control and consent systems could be effective when first rolled out but could not 'cope with the evolving capacity of children' or properly protect a 'child's digital footprint'. Communications Minister Anika Wells is likely to receive the full trial findings later this month. NewsWire / Martin Ollman Credit: News Corp Australia
It also warned that 'service providers were over-anticipating the eventual needs of regulators' and over-collecting user data.
This consequently 'increased risk of privacy breaches', according to the findings.
But Mr Allen said the 'clear conclusion' was that enforcing age limits could be enforced safely.
He held back on putting a figure on the efficacy, noting the measurers were not 'foolproof'.
'There are ways that they (children) can get around them,' Mr Allen said.
'But then we've had tobacco laws for 100 years to stop children accessing tobacco, and it doesn't stop them from accessing some children from tobacco.
'So you have to try and work on how you reduce the risk and reduce the instance.
'You'll never completely eliminate it.'
NewsWire understands the full findings will be handed to the government later this month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Herald Sun
an hour ago
- Herald Sun
Brisbane households who don't want green waste bin hit with $50 fee
Don't miss out on the headlines from Sustainability. Followed categories will be added to My News. Households in a major city are set to be slugged with an extra $50 waste levy as the council announces a major rollout as part of its annual budget to help skirt the state government's 'bin tax'. From August, Brisbane City Council will introduce the Universal Waste Charge, an opt-out green waste program for about 170,000 stand-alone households that will replace the Waste Utility Charge and scrap existing surcharges. Instead, residents will be charged a flat annual universal waste fee of $512.96 – whether they use the new green waste bin or not. This is an increase of about $50 per year, with the rollout expected to take place between August and December. Brisbane City Council will introduce an annual universal fee for green waste bins – even if you don't use it. Picture: NewsWire/Tertius Pickard Residents who already paid for a green waste bin will not have to cop the fee. However, those who do not want the bin will still have to pay the extra fee. 'Other households will pay an extra $49.52 a year, with $33 of this increase related to the waste levy introduced by the former Labor state government,' a council statement read. Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner said the annual fee would help the council dodge the state government's 'bin tax'. Picture: NewsWire / Glenn Campbell Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner said the change was part of a 'large-scale tax-avoidance scheme' that would help the council dodge the state government's 'bin tax'. He said the introduction of the green bins would help reduce strain on growing landfills. 'One of the things this does is it helps us avoid the state government's bin tax,' he said per The Brisbane Times. 'Every year there's a tax that increases on waste going to landfill. 'At the moment, for example, our green waste recycling program saves about $1.6m a year in state government taxes. 'We're running a large-scale tax avoidance scheme because I don't want anyone to have to pay the state government's bin tax.' The state government levy was introduced in 2019 and charges the council about $115 per tonne of waste in the landfill. It is expected to increase by $10 every year until 2028. Brisbane will roll out 170,000 bins to households in the coming months. Picture: Supplied The annual fee aims to reduce the amount of waste heading into landfills. Picture: Supplied Mr Schrinner argued the recently announced annual fee would help save between $2m and $3m within the first year of the scheme. In the span of five years, Brisbane City Council estimates it will save approximately $32m. 'Every house will get a green bin, and that will be part of the business-as-usual service,' he said per The Brisbane Times. 'The reason we're doing that is because of the state government's bin tax … that effectively forces ever-increasing costs onto councils.' Originally published as Brisbane households slugged with $50 green waste bin fee – even if they don't want one
West Australian
3 hours ago
- West Australian
‘Crocodile tears': Home loan change could add to worsening housing crisis
It's now easier for Australians to buy a home, but a key change to credit limits could push up the price of housing, a leading economist warns. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) announced on Thursday that Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) debts would be excluded from the credit limit for prospective homebuyers from September 30. Independent economist Saul Eslake told NewsWire that the change's two most obvious effects would be to 'allow some people who'd buy a home anyway to buy a more expensive one and (to) allow some people who wouldn't have been able to buy a home because of their student debt' to do so'. 'The net effect of those two factors will be to increase the demand for housing,' he said. 'The likely result is that it will, along with other things that governments are doing, put further upward pressure on the prices of property.' Mr Eslake said the change meant some people would be able to enter the housing market more quickly than otherwise but 'it would come at the expense of others'. 'The primary beneficiaries of this change will be those who will already own property will be able to sell it to people at higher prices than otherwise,' he said. 'That's consistent with the 60 years of evidence that we have, going back to the first homeowners grant scheme introduced by the Menzies government in 1964 that tells us that anything that allows Australians to pay more for housing than they'd be able to otherwise results in more expensive housing and a smaller proportion of the population owning it.' Mr Eslake added it was 'obvious' the money saved on HELP debt cuts would now be going towards a more expensive house. 'The reason that governments keep doing these things despite the evidence and despite all of the crocodile tears they routinely share about the difficulties faced by would-be first-home buyers is because they know that there actually aren't very many of them,' Mr Eslake said. 'On average, 110,000 a year, whereas there are 11 million people who own their own home. There are 2¼ million who own at least one investment property. That's an awfully much bigger number of votes for policies that keep house prices going up than there are for policies that might restrain the rate at which house prices keep going up.' Mr Eslake said the reason the housing crisis continued to worsen was 'because a majority of the population do not want it to be solved and politicians know that'. 'Until enough people my age, either out of an altruistic concern for the ability of their children and grandchildren to be able to do what they did, or perhaps more likely out of being pissed off at having to be the bank of mum and dad, until enough of them really want that to change, it isn't going to change.'
Perth Now
3 hours ago
- Perth Now
‘Crocodile tears': Warning over key change
It's now easier for Australians to buy a home, but a key change to credit limits could push up the price of housing, a leading economist warns. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) announced on Thursday that Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) debts would be excluded from the credit limit for prospective homebuyers from September 30. Independent economist Saul Eslake told NewsWire that the change's two most obvious effects would be to 'allow some people who'd buy a home anyway to buy a more expensive one and (to) allow some people who wouldn't have been able to buy a home because of their student debt' to do so'. It's now a little easier to buy a home. NewsWire/ Gaye Gerard Credit: News Corp Australia 'The net effect of those two factors will be to increase the demand for housing,' he said. 'The likely result is that it will, along with other things that governments are doing, put further upward pressure on the prices of property.' Mr Eslake said the change meant some people would be able to enter the housing market more quickly than otherwise but 'it would come at the expense of others'. 'The primary beneficiaries of this change will be those who will already own property will be able to sell it to people at higher prices than otherwise,' he said. 'That's consistent with the 60 years of evidence that we have, going back to the first homeowners grant scheme introduced by the Menzies government in 1964 that tells us that anything that allows Australians to pay more for housing than they'd be able to otherwise results in more expensive housing and a smaller proportion of the population owning it.' Mr Eslake added it was 'obvious' the money saved on HELP debt cuts would now be going towards a more expensive house. Independent economist Saul Eslake says the government cries 'crocodile tears' for first-home buyers while introducing measures that increase housing prices. Chris Kidd Credit: News Corp Australia 'The reason that governments keep doing these things despite the evidence and despite all of the crocodile tears they routinely share about the difficulties faced by would-be first-home buyers is because they know that there actually aren't very many of them,' Mr Eslake said. 'On average, 110,000 a year, whereas there are 11 million people who own their own home. There are 2¼ million who own at least one investment property. That's an awfully much bigger number of votes for policies that keep house prices going up than there are for policies that might restrain the rate at which house prices keep going up.' Mr Eslake said the reason the housing crisis continued to worsen was 'because a majority of the population do not want it to be solved and politicians know that'. 'Until enough people my age, either out of an altruistic concern for the ability of their children and grandchildren to be able to do what they did, or perhaps more likely out of being pissed off at having to be the bank of mum and dad, until enough of them really want that to change, it isn't going to change.'
