Communications Minister Anika Wells has confirmed the federal government will strip controversial ministerial rule-making powers from its proposed Digital Duty of Care Bill. Speaking ahead of her address to the National Press Club on Thursday, Ms Wells stated that authority to define new forms of serious online harm will instead require legislative amendment through Parliament.
Did You Know? The Digital Duty of Care policy was first proposed by former Communications Minister Michelle Rowland in October 2024 as a key recommendation stemming from a review of the Online Safety Act, mirroring similar regulatory frameworks in the United Kingdom and European Union.
Free Speech Concerns and Voter Discontent Prompt Policy Retreat
The decision to abandon broad ministerial discretion follows intense public consultation on an exposure draft released on September 8, which initially proposed penalties of $109.2 million for corporations violating online safety rules. During that consultation window, the Coalition, the Greens, and One Nation raised significant free speech concerns, warning that the legislation granted the Communications Minister unchecked power to determine what constitutes harmful content online.
Public polling published by News24.com.au reflected widespread unease with those provisions. Roughly half of survey respondents expressed discomfort regarding the proposed ministerial powers, with 20 percent stating the Minister for Communications would hold “too much power” to determine harmful content, and another 28 percent indicating the law was necessary but should exclude ministerial rule-making authority.
Parliamentary Scrutiny and the Push for Global Revenue Fines
Despite the government’s concession on rule-making powers, the broader legislative package faces additional hurdles in Parliament. Coalition and Greens representatives confirmed their intention to refer the Digital Duty of Care legislation to a Senate inquiry. Opposition communications spokeswoman Sarah Henderson criticized the bill as deeply flawed, aiming for an inquiry report date of November 24 during the final sitting week of the year.
Meanwhile, the Greens have indicated they will use their position in negotiations to demand tougher financial penalties for non-compliant tech giants. Greens communications spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young argued that proposed set-amount fines are insufficient to alter corporate behavior, pushing instead for penalties tied directly to a percentage of corporations’ global revenue alongside provisions for individuals to pursue private legal action.
Advocates raise concerns over automated moderation flagging harm-reduction material
As the legislation heads to Parliament, public health advocates have raised concerns that automated moderation systems used by platforms like Meta and TikTok routinely flag vital harm-reduction material, drug-checking alerts, and sexual health education as promoting illicit activities or prohibited content.
Communications Minister Anika Wells has abandoned her extraordinary powers to define harmful content online, scrapping the authority from Labor's controversial Digital Duty of Care laws.https://t.co/rhOZRGEYf6
The finalized bill incorporates targeted safeguards and structural user controls. Under-18s will receive specific protections against eating disorder material, crime glorification, pornography, sexist content, and severe abuse or bullying. The “My Feed, My Way” initiative will require platforms to offer users over the age of 16 the ability to opt in or out of algorithmic feeds, while an express exemption has been added to protect professional news reporting.
Government removes ministerial power over serious online harm categories
What specific changes did Communications Minister Anika Wells announce regarding the Digital Duty of Care Bill?
Ms Wells confirmed that the government has removed the ministerial rule-making power that would have allowed the Communications Minister to define new categories of serious online harm. Instead, adding new harms will require formal legislative amendments introduced directly to Parliament.
What user controls and age protections are included in the revised legislation?
The bill includes the “My Feed, My Way” initiative, requiring platforms to give users over 16 the option to opt in or out of algorithmic feeds. It also mandates additional protections for users under 18 against content promoting eating disorders, dangerous stunts, pornography, misogyny, and severe abuse or bullying.
Why are political parties referring the legislation to a Senate inquiry?
Both the Coalition and the Greens confirmed plans to send the online safety package to a Senate inquiry to thoroughly examine the mechanisms of the bill, review proposed penalties, and address ongoing concerns regarding free speech and algorithmic regulation.
How should policymakers balance the urgent need to protect children online with safeguarding open access to public health and educational resources?
Worth a look