The Australian Greens will demand sweeping amendments to the federal government’s digital duty of care legislation, conditioning their crucial Senate support on provisions that allow individuals to sue big tech platforms directly for online harm. The minor party also wants statutory penalties levied against social media companies to be calculated as a direct percentage of their global revenue, rather than relying on fixed monetary caps.
The intervention sets up an immediate legislative hurdle for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government, which intends to introduce the landmark regulatory package into federal Parliament during the week starting Monday, October 12, 2026. With the conservative opposition Coalition refusing to back the bill on free speech grounds, the government must secure the backing of the Greens to pass the measures through the Senate.
Sarah Hanson-Young pushes for private right of action against big tech
Greens communications spokesperson Senator Sarah Hanson-Young confirmed on Sunday, October 11, 2026, that the party will drive hard bargains during negotiations. She argued that regulatory enforcement cannot rest entirely on the country’s online safety watchdog, the eSafety Commissioner, but must empower harmed citizens to seek financial compensation through the courts.
Follow: Australia navigates foreign policy priorities while strengthening digital safety oversight
“To meaningfully change the behaviour of big tech companies, the digital duty of care laws must include the right for Australians who have been harmed online to be able to take legal action and seek compensation for the damage done,” Hanson-Young said. “Enforcement of the digital duty of care cannot be left to the eSafety commissioner alone. To really put Australians’ online safety at the heart of this reform, individuals and the community need to have the right to take on big tech through a private right of action.”
The Greens are also rejecting the government’s current proposed financial penalties as insufficient to alter the corporate conduct of trillion-dollar digital conglomerates. Labor had initially outlined base fines starting at A$ 100 million for platforms that fail to protect their users from systemic online harms, following an exposure draft released for public consultation on Tuesday, September 8, 2026.
Read also: Queensland introduces controversial mining laws, limiting public challenge to new projects
“Fines for breaches must be tied to a percentage of global revenue,” Hanson-Young stated. “The threat of serious fines and compensation is the only way to force these companies to clean up their act and proactively provide a safe environment for their users.”
Labor targets digital harms across platforms and artificial intelligence
Under the statutory framework drafted by the Albanese government, digital platforms will be legally obligated to implement structural safety features directly into the architecture of their services, an approach known as safety by design. Communications Minister Anika Wells has argued that voluntary compliance has completely failed over the past decade and a half, leaving mandatory legislative intervention as the only viable mechanism to safeguard the public.
“We want these platforms to embed safety by design,” Wells said. “Some of them have had 15 years to do it of their own accord. They haven’t, so now we’re going to legislate that they must.”
The legislation applies across a broad spectrum of digital products and consumer services operating within Australia, capturing both major social networks and emerging software platforms. The rules require operators to document their safety risk assessments and maintain formal processes to mitigate several categories of online harm:
- Pornographic material accessible to underage accounts
- Content promoting or encouraging eating disorders
- Misogynistic material and coordinated gender-based harassment
- Material glorifying criminal conduct or life-endangering stunts
- Abuse, bullying, and content causing severe psychological distress
- Interactive exposure generated by artificial intelligence chatbots
- Addictive algorithms across video games, web applications, and digital feeds
The draft legislation also mandates that tech companies provide users aged 16 and older with explicit operational tools to turn off algorithm-driven recommendation feeds, allowing people to browse chronologically rather than through engagement-maximising systems.
David Shoebridge leads first major Senate negotiations for Greens
The debate surrounding the duty of care framework represents the first high-stakes legislative test for Senator David Shoebridge since taking over the federal leadership of the Australian Greens from Larissa Waters. Shoebridge has signaled a significantly tougher posture toward Labor’s legislative agenda, simultaneously pushing separate crossbench proposals including a ban on importing smart glasses fitted with concealed cameras and other privacy-invasive wearable tech.
The push to strengthen digital accountability follows widespread scrutiny over Australia’s previously enacted ban on social media access for minors under 16 years of age. That measure faced criticism from the Greens after official tracking data confirmed that 80% of teenagers under 16 remained actively logged into major social networks through technical workarounds, demonstrating what critics described as the severe shortcomings of relying on blunt access prohibitions rather than structural design mandates.
Coalition rejects digital duty of care bill over speech concerns
While the Greens seek harsher penalties and broader courtroom access, the federal Coalition has broken entirely with the government over the bill. Shadow Communications Minister Sarah Henderson condemned the digital duty of care framework during an address to the Conservative Political Action Conference on Sunday, October 11, 2026, claiming that placing broad harm-prevention obligations on platforms would inevitably result in corporate censorship of controversial opinions.
“At stake is something generations of Australians have fought and died to defend,” Henderson said. “Your freedom of speech questions authority, to challenge government, to expose injustice, and above all, the freedom to disagree.”
Both the federal government and the Greens reject the opposition’s censorship claims, arguing that the duty of care does not police individual opinions or speech, but instead forces tech platforms to address algorithmic amplification and product flaws that cause documented psychological and physical harm.
Minister Wells is scheduled to deliver a formal address outlining the government’s digital regulation agenda at the National Press Club in Canberra on Thursday, October 15, 2026, as negotiations over the text continue behind closed doors.
