Australia will ban children under 16 from using social media, after its parliament approved the world’s toughest laws.

The ban, which will not come into force for at least 12 months, could result in fines of up to A$50 million ($32.5 million; £25.7 million) if they do not do not comply with it.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the legislation was needed to protect young people from the “harms” of social media, which many parent groups echoed.

But critics say questions about how the ban works – and its impact on privacy and social connections – have gone unanswered.

This is not the first global attempt to restrict children’s use of social media, but the minimum age of 16 is the highest set by any country. Unlike other attempts, it also does not include exemptions for existing users or those with parental consent.

After passing the Senate by a 34-19 vote Thursday evening, the bill returned to the House of Representatives where it passed Friday morning.

“We want our children to have a childhood and for parents to know that we support them,” Albanese later told reporters.

The legislation does not specify which platforms will be banned. Those decisions will be made later by Australia’s communications minister, who will seek advice from the Electronic Safety Commissioner, an internet regulator who will enforce the rules.

However, Minister Michelle Rowland said the ban would cover Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram and X. Gaming and messaging platforms are exempt, as are sites accessed without an account, meaning YouTube, for example, is likely to do so. be spared.

The government says it will rely on some form of age verification technology to implement the restrictions, and the options will be tested in the coming months. It will be up to social media platforms to add these processes themselves.

However, digital researchers cautioned that there was no guarantee the unspecified technology – which could rely on biometrics or identity information – would work. Critics also asked for assurances that privacy would be protected.

They also warned that restrictions could easily be circumvented with tools such as a VPN, which can hide a user’s location and make it appear as if they are connecting from another country.

However, children who find a way to flout the rules will not be punished.

Polling on the reforms, while limited, suggests they are supported by a majority of Australian parents and guardians.

“For too long, parents have had this impossible choice between giving in and giving their child an addictive device or seeing their child isolated and feeling excluded,” Amy Friedlander, who was among those pushing for it, recently told the BBC. for the ban.

“We are stuck in a norm that no one wants to be a part of.”

But many experts say the ban is “too blunt an instrument” to effectively address the risks associated with social media use, and have warned it could end up pushing children to less regulated corners of the internet .

During a short consultation period before the bill passed, Google and Snap criticized the legislation for not providing more details, and Meta said the bill would be “ineffective” and would not address to its stated goal of making children safer.

In its submission, TikTok said the government’s definition of a social media platform was so “broad and unclear” that “nearly any online service could fall under it.”

X questioned the “legality” of the bill, saying it may not be consistent with international regulations and human rights treaties signed by Australia.

Some youth advocates have also accused the government of not fully understanding the role social media plays in their lives and of excluding them from the debate.

“We understand that we are vulnerable to the risks and negative impacts of social media… but we must be involved in developing solutions,” wrote the eSafety Youth Council, which advises the regulator.

Albanese acknowledged the debate was complex but strongly defended the bill.

“We are not claiming that its implementation will be perfect, just like banning alcohol for (children) under 18 does not mean that someone under 18 will never have access to it – but we know it’s the right thing to do,” he said. Friday.

Last year, France introduced legislation to block access to social media for children under 15 without parental permission, although research indicates almost half of users were able to avoid the ban using a VPN.

A law in the US state of Utah, similar to Australia’s, has been struck down by a federal judge who deemed it unconstitutional.

Australian laws are followed with great interest by leaders around the world.

Norway recently pledged to follow in the country’s footsteps, and last week the UK’s technology secretary said a similar ban was “on the table” – although he later added “not.” .. For now “.

Additional reporting by Tiffanie Turnbull in Sydney