Coercive new powers for eSafety to enforce u16 social media ban foreshadows digital duty of care

Share this edition:

“In its apparent desperation to catch someone – anyone – for violating the under-16 social media ban, the federal government is chasing its bad laws with broader and more coercive powers to engage in regulatory fishing expeditions,” said Dr Andrew Bushnell, Director, Law and Freedom Program at the Institute of Public Affairs.

Today, the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026 passed the House of Representatives:

IPA analysis of the bill reveals that in addition to doubling the fines for social media companies if they fail to comply with the under-16 social media ban, the powers of the eSafety Commissioner’s would also be expanded to force third parties to give information and produce documents when the commissioner merely believes on “reasonable grounds” it is “relevant to compliance.”

“Ever since the U16 social media ban came into force in December 2025, compliance has been weak and the government seems embarrassed that it has not issued a single fine to social media companies,” said Dr Bushnell.

“The practical effect of these new powers and fines is to encourage digital companies to over-comply by erring on the side of excluding lawful users from social media.”

“These changes give a preview of the government’s proposed digital duty of care, which will put the onus on tech giants to somehow make the internet safe under threat of government prosecution.”

A recent IPA analysis of the Baumgarten case has detailed the suppressing effect of existing laws and regulatory practices on freedom of speech on the internet. Proposed to be added to these laws is the so-called Digital Duty of Care, which the federal government announced its support for in November 2024 and would require social media companies to take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable harms.

“The proposed digital duty of care will double down on the government’s failed approach, which has seen unlawful censorship by the eSafety Commissioner successfully challenged in court and widespread non-compliance with the social media ban,” said Dr Bushnell.

Related IPA research can be found here.

Andrew Bushnell

Dr Andrew Bushnell is the Director, Law and Freedom Program and Senior Fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs
Stay up to date

Sign up to our newsletter to stay up to date with the IPA’s work

Support the IPA

If you liked what you read, consider supporting the IPA. We are entirely funded by individual supporters like you.

Related Posts

Women can’t ‘have it all’ without choosing what to give up

Women can have families and successful careers. Millions do. What we can’t...

States, Canberra to go over Covid cliff ‘all in debt together’

Remember Long Covid? Medical experts still debate its provenance and prevalence, but...

Western Australia Hit Hardest by “Safeguard” Carbon Tax

“The proposed expansion of the Safeguard Mechanism, an effective carbon tax on...

Institute of Public Affairs Analysis of the Safeguard Mechanism Review

Key Findings: Annual Carbon Credit Cost of Safeguard Mechanism under proposed 2035...