Labor wants safer feeds for kids. Critics see censorship.

Happy sitting week! If you’ve been forwarded this newsletter, you can sign up free here. ESSENTIALS Parliament’s flashpoint this week is child safety, algorithms and censorship. Defense officials heading for Senate estimates showdown. Inside QLD Premier’s Silicon Valley tour parading National Cabinet data center win. DRIVING THE DAY DIGITAL DUTY OF CARE LEGISLATION COMING The scene is set for a divisive debate about Labor’s digital duty of care legislation this week — will it help children, enable censorship, or both? The government is yet to unveil the legislation in full but details are steadily leaking, including that it would introduce an opt-out model for algorithms on social media feeds, as David Speers reported. The pressure has been ratcheting up after a series of shocking sexual assault allegations in NSW involving teen boys. The Minns government convened an emergency roundtable on Friday to discuss the wave of violence, which it suspects is fed by hateful online content. Biggest point of contention: Should the law require opting in to an algorithm or merely allow users to opt out of it? Opting in is the more extreme measure, but according to advocates it’s also much more likely to be effective. Case in point: how many of you reject “cookies” when given the opt-out, which brings the risk of reduced functionality on a website? If the Coalition won’t support the bill, Labor could choose to win Greens support by moving to an opt-in model. Burdens on tech companies: The legislation would also require social media companies to mitigate risks and reduce the sharing of harmful content, including specific psychosocial harms that affect kids (think posts about body image and bullying). News24’s Andrew Clennell also reported companies could cop $100 million penalties for failing to comply. Angus Taylor is skeptical: He says this could be an attempt at censorship, and thinks it’s more important to bolster teen social media restrictions. An amendment to social media laws to impose harsher fines and give eSafety more power is working its way through parliamentary committees. Sen. Jonno Duniam, the Opposition’s home affairs spokesperson, said he’s open to an opt-out algorithm model provided it “doesn’t unnecessarily impede on people’s rights and freedoms.” One Orwellian Nation: Rather than giving Australians choices, Sen. Pauline Hanson sees government intervention in algorithms as “building the Orwellian machinery” for government censorship. Talk about a farewell tour: Duniam, who soft launched his departure from Parliament in June, now says he’ll be gone in the next “month or two,” but keeps piling up his calendar, first with finalizing the Coalition’s immigration policy, then work on the new AI committee and now digital duty of care. BURNING FOR ATTENTION: Angus Taylor’s follow-up to the Coalition’s tobacco policy is a proposed federal criminal offense for burning or otherwise desecrating the Australian flag. It took no time at all to attract questions about undercutting One Nation. Playbook’s question: Is Taylor angling to use this measure as a bargaining chip, or cover, during the next round of legislative negotiations with Labor? CAN FOSTER CARE FIX HOME AFFAIRS? Shedding hundreds of roles through voluntary redundancies this year, Secretary Stephanie Foster has reshaped the Home Affairs mega-department significantly since taking on the top job three years ago, reports Miriam Webber. (See how the department looked in 2024 compared with today.) An intelligence division is disbanded in a move intended “to better align intelligence functions with operational areas,” and the department also moved “relevant capabilities to more directly support the requirements of the Australian Border Force and immigration planning and operations,” a spokesperson told Playbook. Foster’s era is also focusing on culture shifts: The department is notorious for low morale, but staff census results have improved significan