Just on that, though, in terms of why it was included in the first place, can you think of any examples of things that might not be included in the legislation but are likely to pop up at some point in the future?

One of the challenges of this area is that tech moves so quickly.

And what you and I are discussing today, it may well be out of date by this time next week.

I gave an example that we had across the Christmas New Year break.

Grok came out, you might remember.

X put out Grok.

It allowed people to digitally alter photographs digitally.

Given the potential of the global impact of this kind of legislation, how do you wear that responsibility?

What does this legislation really mean?

As a parent, we don't expect you to police what your kids are doing 24 hours a day.

It's impossible.

And neither you nor your children, like you say, Justin, cannot fight the addictive nature of social media.

That's why your government is taking up this fight for parents.

We want you to be able to say this is the law and you can point to the law to try and address these daily fights that people are having in their home.

And that's why The social media minimum age, when it first came in, wasn't actually an idea that came out of government.

And so my question is, how is this a better outcome for a 13-year-old boy than what we had before?

What does this legislation really mean?

As a parent, we don't expect you to police what your kids are doing 24 hours a day.

It's impossible.

And neither you nor your children, like you say, Justin, cannot fight the addictive nature of social media.

That's why your government is taking up this fight for parents.

We want you to be able to say this is the law and you can point to the law to try and address these daily fights that people are having in their home.

And that's why The social media minimum age, when it first came in, wasn't actually an idea that came out of government.

And so my question is, how is this a better outcome for a 13-year-old boy than what we had before?

So what is the limit on what you might be able to define as harm?

Well, there's three limits.

Firstly, I must consult with the safety commissioner.

Secondly, when I make the rule, any member or senator can move a disallowance motion in the House or the Senate.

I have 15 days to convince that member or senator.

And if I don't, it goes to a vote on the floor.

majority wins.

Is there something you're willing to do to put more friction in the system to tackle this problem of doom scrolling and addiction of social media?

Should there be a system of enforceable reliability standards holding these telecommunications companies to account?

Rachael, we have legislation before the Parliament right now that tries to improve consumer standards for telcos.

We have both the TEXT Bill and the OMEO Bill, so TEXT is enhancing consumer standards and safeguards.

Um [lip smacks]Look, I'm sure, Rachel, that Telstra has internal standards about that.

What we need here is for co- companies to competently discharge their duties to customers.

And whilst we have been the r- well, there's been multiple reviews into the Optus September outage, there will be reviews into this outage.

Those preliminary investigations have already begun.

Do you think the ABC's reporting is biased?

How far advanced are you in your conversations with the Coalition and the Greens and others in Parliament about the prospects of it passing?

Look, this is something that has been debated for a long time.

In fact, the Coalition and the Greens have obviously talked about they'd like to see action sooner.

The int- the legislation's finally ready.

It's been through the exposure draft process, so I guess everybody's had a chance to weigh in on that.

We'll introduce it today, and like I said earlier this week, it, it is usually the case that these things go off to a Senate inquiry.

It's usually the case that members of the House of Reps will make amendments, and we would expect that to happen t- from today.

Is it really as hard to go as, to go further as you suggest?

D- does that mean it, the scheme isn't working, in your view right now?

I think we can all agree we would like the scheme to work better than it is currently, but that is on big tech taking the mickey.

And I think, like I've said before, there are two pieces to this.

There are the actual enforcement mechanisms that we need to do now.

That's what we are beefing up, um, this week in the Parliament with more powers for the eSafety Commissioner and doubling the fine for big tech.

But then there's also the broader cultural change piece, and much like when seat belts became mandatory in cars, it took a while for people to observe that law, and this is about the five-year-olds, the nine-year-olds who will never have a social media account until 16.

That change will take a while to seep through.

How concerned are you as sports minister for the, what the implications might mean for athletes here in Australia?

Julie Inman Grant described these platforms as, quote, "hunting grounds," but would you consider including these platforms under the social media ban?

Well, uh, Julie's right there.

The hint's in the name.

It's the Social Media Minimum Age Ban that we brought in, and it was designed to try and address the online harms Australian kids are suffering, and particularly those functions and features that we've narrowed in on, like the toxic popularity meters and the infinite scroll and the disappearing messages.

Um, so it's for that reason that we formed the laws that we did.

But like you say, Sally, if a gaming platform was to exhibit those features and functions that would cause it to become primarily more like a social media platform, we would absolutely reconsider that.

And that's why I met with the, the CEO and founder of Roblox.

Why are you giving the TV networks a free ride?

Do you think the political conditions for tax reform have shifted in the past seven years?

I think...

I'm, I'm, I'm doing a lot of doorknocking at the moment.

I do think that the conversations that we have on doorsteps with people about, um, their worries, um, weren't necessarily, um, born out in the particular electoral results in particular seats in the 2019 federal election.

Something I experienced as a candidate, like you said, were parents and grandparents worrying that their kids would never be able to afford a home.

Their kids might still be living with them, you know, years or even decades after they'd all anticipated that to be true.

People want that to change, and housing affordability, I think you're right, in the past seven years has become a, a crisper issue for everybody, and I certainly know that people talk to me in my electorate about wanting to see more action on that front.

But would you consider including these platforms under the social media ban?

... mean, I, I guess I am a little surprised that there's been so much, um, compliance and willingness to work with you, given that there are probably pretty high financial stakes involved for them from the ban that might outweigh the, the aggregate fine.

Absolutely.

And that has been put to us as well.

I mean, though that fine is commensurate with other fines in that sort of portfolio space in Australia, you're right.

We, we absolutely worried about the risk that platforms would decide to just pay the fine and continue to flout the law.

The, the response to that has been that ultimately, these are big corporate citizens, big global citizens.

They want to be seen as good citizens, um, that they feel that a number of them have made huge improvements in safety features over the years and, and that that isn't acknowledged in, in this kind of, um, blunt force ban.

Um, how will you judge whether this has been a success? Like, what are you looking for?