Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026

A modest majority voted against a second reading amendment introduced by Representative Melissa McIntosh (Liberal).

A normal second reading motion is "that the bill be read for a second time", which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing to the bill at the second reading stage. A second reading amendment does not change the actual text of the proposed law. Instead, it amends the motion itself and may be used to express an opinion about the bill or related policy, highlight perceived flaws, or call for further action.

Because the majority voted 'No', the amendment was unsuccessful.

Amendment Text

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) recognises that the former Coalition Government delivered world-leading online safety reforms, including the enactment of the Online Safety Act 2021, which set an international benchmark for protecting Australians, and children in particular, online;

(2) notes the Government's social media age restrictions were poorly designed, and badly implemented which has compromised the online safety of Australian children and failed parents, and this bill is an embarrassing admission the Government is failing;

(3) expresses concern the Government's proposed digital duty of care remains ill-defined and uncertain in its scope and operation, and that the Government has failed to explain how it would work, what obligations it would impose, or how it would be enforced without creating unintended consequences; and

(4) expresses further concern that much more needs to be done to protect children online, including by giving parents access to effective mobile device safety tools, and combating the addictive algorithms which fuel harmful 'doom scrolling' on social media feeds”.