Opening Statement - Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026 - Carol Bennett, ACCAN CEO

Thank you Chair and Committee for the opportunity to appear today.  

ACCAN is the peak national consumer advocacy organisation for communications. We advocate for trusted, accessible, affordable and reliable communications and digital services. 

ACCAN supports the proposals in the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026 to provide eSafety with stronger information-gathering powers, and the substantial increases in penalties for non-compliance – bringing the penalties under this framework into line with the Competition and Consumer Act.

This Bill presents an important opportunity to strengthen the operation of the Social Media Minimum Age Framework.

Earlier this year, e-Safety announced significant concerns about the compliance of five social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube with the new Social Media Minimum Age obligations. E-Safety highlighted major gaps in compliance by these platforms.[1]

As such, information-gathering powers and higher penalties are important tools for a strong regulator to wield, particularly against global digital giants such as Meta, Snapchat and TikTok, and in the context of critical obligations to prevent harm to children and young people in Australia.

In addition to the changes proposed by the Bill before this Committee, ACCAN strongly supports the recommendation of the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman to develop an ombuds scheme for digital platform users. Currently, there is no third party dispute resolution body in place for consumers to escalate problems they encounter with digital platforms. 

There is a clear need for a free and fair dispute resolution pathway for Australian consumers in this sector, and for an independent body with jurisdiction over digital platforms to hold them to account for their interactions with consumers. This is a key consumer protection measure that is lacking, not just in relation to social media, but digital platforms more broadly.

I note that, to date, there has been some criticism of the legislated obligations this Bill seeks to amend. Concerns have been raised about the framework’s impact, efficacy and enforcement. Early observations assert that the ban could be more effective, that compliance is uneven, and verification from platforms is often either non-existent or easy to bypass.[2] 

However, eSafety’s own research has also shown that the proportion of children aged 10 to 15 who own a social media account declined from 52.4% at baseline, to 42.1%.[3]

These are positive, early signs. Uneven compliance underscores the importance of the regulatory measures contained in this Bill – which will assist eSafety in stronger and better compliance and enforcement activity.

And a statistically significant drop in social media account ownership in children aged 10-15, relatively soon after the obligations came into effect, can only be described as progress.

Strong public health evidence points to a variety of serious harms stemming from use of social media by young people. Impacts on cognitive and emotional development, mental health, and relationships have been established.

This framework is one very important step in addressing these harms, and as more evidence and data emerges over time, a broader set of responses can and should be developed in tandem with the law.

No ban is perfect, and historically we have seen they take time to change behaviours – not everyone started wearing seatbelts overnight. In a rapidly evolving technological landscape, responses need to be swift, agile and effective, but also given appropriate time to shift the dial.

However, the risks associated with social media services should not sit with our young people who are poorly placed to bear them. Instead, the evidentiary burden should sit with the social media companies to demonstrate that these services provide value to minors and can be provided safely to them.

So far they have not – and this is why there has been broad political consensus that a ban should be implemented if and until these services can be provided safely. We do not allow the unregulated sale of products in a variety of markets where there are material risks of harm and an absence of evidence to the effect that the products are safe and beneficial. The use of high-risk products by children and young people are also routinely restricted on the well accepted principal children lack the capacity to enter into complex contracts. The proposition that children under the age of 16 should be allowed to enter into complex contracts – that have potentially significant long-term consequences for their privacy and use of their personal data is an unsound one – particularly in circumstances where the benefit of social media services to minors is not demonstrable on the evidence.

This Bill is a key step towards strengthening the framework and giving the regulator the tools it needs to hold social media platforms to account and ensure they meet their obligations under Australian law.

We are happy to take any questions the Committee may have.  

[1] Five social media platforms flagged for compliance issues | eSafety Commissioner

[2] From Phreaking to Sneaking: Children's Circumvention of Social Media Age Verification Systems

[3] Key developments show eSafety’s holistic approach is working | eSafety Commissioner