Lillian
Hanly, Political reporter
The
ACT party believes the outcome of an inquiry it initiated
was “predetermined”, after a select committee recommended
introducing age restrictions for social media
platforms.
It gave a “differing opinion” on most of
the recommendations made, saying they fail to “clearly
define the harm they are trying to address” and “risk
undermining privacy and free expression”.
The
Education and Workforce Committee inquiry into the harm
social media causes for young people online showed the harm
was significant, fast-moving and occurring on a global
scale.
The list of recommendations to the government
and private sector also included establishing a national
regulator and regulating deepfake technology.
The New
Zealand government has explored
options of a social media ban after Australia
implemented one, with National keen to progress with one
before the end of this term.
National MP Catherine
Wedd submitted a member’s bill to legislate a ban, while the
education minister is doing separate work around
regulation.
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
ACT opposed a ban, with MP Dr Parmjeet
Parmar instead requesting an inquiry by Parliament’s
Education and Workforce Committee into social media
harm.
Following the release of the report Parmar said
the committee was supposed to explore “properly” how social
media could be regulated.
She said she felt the
committee members had some “predetermined solutions”, and
jumped to those rather than doing the work
properly.
Parmar used the social media ban for
under-16s as an example, “the whole thing was centred around
that,” but she said the advisers didn’t provide advice on
the issue.
“The reason that was given was that
minister Erica Stanford, is doing some work in that regard,
so they didn’t want to provide advice to the select
committee.
“That really undermined the role of the
Select Committee as well, because select committee should
have done this work independently of government, and that’s
where I’m really disappointed that we didn’t seek that
advice.”
There was a material gap in the evidence
heard and advice received, and the majority of the select
committee jumped to recommend a social media ban for under
16 year olds, she said.
Parmar was also critical of
the recommendation of regulating or banning certain apps,
asking “how do you define ‘nudify’ apps?”
“That’s the
question here, and that was unexplored
properly.”
Behaviour should be regulated, rather than
technology, she said.
“We don’t want to ban
technology, we want to actually regulate the behaviour,
because technology will keep evolving.”
The select
committee report
National’s Committee Lead on the
Inquiry Carl Bates said the report made clear that “the harm
young New Zealanders are facing from online platforms is
significant. It is fast-moving and occurring on a global
scale”.
He said New Zealand should be a
“fast-follower” in this space as opposed to a “first mover”,
both lagging behind other countries and trying to be unique
in the approach could result in “less effective outcomes for
our young people.”
“This is a step towards important,
timely action,” he said.
Labour backed the report,
saying it confirmed the party’s long held view that keeping
young people safe online required more than simply setting
an age limit.
Labour’s technology and innovation
spokesperson Reuben Davidson said the report meant there was
a better chance now to “educate and empower parents,
caregivers and young people about dangers online.”
“My
Members’ Bill on Online Safety reflects the report’s
direction. It would put three clear legal duties on online
service providers to ensure their platforms are safer,”
Davidson said.
New Zealand needed an independent
regulator to make sure online platforms were safe, and to
ensure social media companies could be held responsible for
the harm they cause, he said.
“We also need clear
rules to control deepfake technology and a ban on “nudify”
apps, which pose real risks to young people’s privacy and
safety.”
He also said he was pleased to work
constructively with National throughout the
inquiry.
The recommendations would now be considered
by Stanford.
What the committee
heard:
- Current laws are not fit for
purpose - Online harm is serious and
widespread - Harm can affect mental health, wellbeing,
and development - Deepfake technology can be misused
to create fake sexual images that cause serious
harm - Algorithms can push harmful or extreme
content - The design of online platforms can cause or
exacerbate harms - Young people are exposed to harmful
advertising - Parents want to help but lack clear
support
What the committee
recommended:
- Address legislative
gaps - Establish an independent national regulator for
online safety - Review platforms’ liability for harm
resulting from the content they host and the platform
design - Introduce age restrictions for social media
platforms - Ban “nudify” apps and prohibit the
creation and distribution of nonconsensual deepfake sexual
imagery - Regulate deepfake
technology - Consider regulating algorithmic
recommendation systems - Explore mandating algorithm
transparency - Promote New Zealand-based
research - Prevent online advertising of alcohol,
tobacco, and gambling for under 18s - Educate and
empower parents, caregivers, and young people
In
terms of the recommendation to introduce age restrictions
the report stated the majority of the committee considered
the intervention “proportionate to the serious nature of the
harm it would mitigate.”
It noted it did not have
information on the government’s proposed approach so could
not indicate the cost-effectiveness and financial
implications of the intervention.
It also said the
intervention was “highly intrusive” compared to the current
absence of restrictions, but “most of us believe that the
nature of the harms we have heard about – through evidence,
anecdote, lived experience, and advice – warrants such
intrusion.”
It could be implemented very quickly, and
the committee hoped to see it in effect within the next 12
months.
“Most of us strongly support this intervention
and wish to see it implemented as soon as practicable. We
urge the government to commit to this as the most useful
immediate solution to prevent further harm.”
The Green
party also submitted a “differing view” regarding the age
restrictions, because it did not believe that would address
the concerns identified.
It said young people had told
them they would find a way around the
rules.
“Effective age restriction requires all users
to provide personal identification to social media
platforms, that already cannot be trusted to protect user
information.
“We are sceptical that age restriction
technology that does not infringe on the privacy of all
users and is effective at preventing minors from accessing
social media platforms exists.
“We are also concerned
that age restrictions could drive youth from regulated
platforms to other fringe, unregulated, and harmful
platforms, undermining the purpose of age
restrictions.”
New Zealand’s public broadcaster, providing comprehensive NZ news and current affairs, specialist audio features and documentaries.
Radio New Zealand is a Crown entity established under the Radio New Zealand Act 1995. Radio New Zealand News are vital elements in our programming, providing impartial news and information to New Zealanders every day. Radio New Zealand (RNZ) provides listeners with exciting and independent radio programmes in accordance with the Radio New Zealand Charter.
