MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia’s House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would ban children younger than 16 years old from social media , leaving it to the Senate to finalize the world-first law. The major parties backed the bill that would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts. The legislation was passed with 102 votes in favor to 13 against. If the bill becomes law this week, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restrictions before the penalties are enforced. Opposition lawmaker Dan Tehan told Parliament the government had agreed to accept amendments in the Senate that would bolster privacy protections. Platforms would not be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued identity documents including passports or driver’s licenses. The platforms also could not demand digital identification through a government system. “Will it be perfect? No. But is any law perfect? No, it’s not. But if it helps, even if it helps in just the smallest of ways, it will make a huge difference to people’s lives,” Tehan told Parliament. Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the Senate would debate the bill later Wednesday. The major parties’ support all but guarantees the legislation will be passed by the Senate where no party holds a majority of seats. Lawmakers who were not aligned with either the government or the opposition were most critical of the legislation during debate on Tuesday and Wednesday. Criticisms include that the legislation had been rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, would not work, would create privacy risks for users of all ages and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children. Critics also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of positive aspects of social media, drive children to the dark web, make children too young for social media reluctant to report harms they encountered and take away incentives for platforms to make online spaces safer. Independent lawmaker Zoe Daniel said the legislation would “make zero difference to the harms that are inherent to social media.” “The true object of this legislation is not to make social media safe by design, but to make parents and voters feel like the government is doing something about it,” Daniel told Parliament. “There is a reason why the government parades this legislation as world-leading, that’s because no other country wants to do it,” she added. T he platforms had asked for the vote on legislation to be delayed until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how the ban could been enforced. Rod Mcguirk, The Associated Press

Marvell forecasts fourth-quarter revenue above estimates on strong AI-backed demandWalmart’s DEI rollback signals a profound shift in the wake of Trump’s election victory

Billionaires and Democrats paying lip service to Trump are in for a rude awakening

Concerns have also been raised about the “renormalisation” of smoking. Dr Rachel O’Donnell, senior research fellow at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said restrictions on smoking in outdoor places can “reinforce” a message that smoking “isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do” and could also help smokers to kick the habit. In November, it emerged that the UK Government is to scrap plans to ban smoking in the gardens of pubs and restaurants in England. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the hospitality industry has “taken a real battering in recent years” and it is not “the right time” to ban smoking outside pubs. But smoking and vaping could be banned in other public places in England – such as in playgrounds or outside of schools – under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. According to the World Health Organisation, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure. In a briefing for journalists, Dr O’Donnell said decision-making “should be on the basis of all the evidence that’s available”. She added: “Any debate about legislation on smoking in outdoor settings shouldn’t only focus on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure levels, because the impacts of restrictions in outdoor settings are also evident on our social norms.” Smoke-free outdoor environments “reinforce smoke-free as the acceptable norm”, she said. “This, I think, is a critically important point at a time where in the media, over the last year, we’ve seen various reports and questions as to whether we might be on the cusp of renormalisation of smoking for various reasons, and so smoke-free public environments still have a critically important role to play. “If you reduce opportunities to smoke, it can also help individuals who smoke themselves to reduce the amount they smoke or to make a quit attempt.” Dr O’Donnell said visibility of tobacco products and smoking is a “form of marketing for tobacco companies” as she pointed to studies highlighting the increasing number of tobacco depictions on screen. She went on: “The more often young adults observe smoking around them, the more likely they are to believe that smoking is socially acceptable, which feeds back into this idea of renormalisation of smoking. “So, restrictions on smoking in outdoor public places have other positive knock-on effects, potentially for young people as well, just sending out that clear message that this isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do and see, and this could help to discourage smoking initiation among young people at quite a critical time.” On being exposed to second-hand smoke at work, she added: “I think sometimes when we think about exposure to second-hand smoke in outdoor settings, in pubs, in restaurants, we think about that sort of occasional customer exposure, the nuisance element of it when people are out enjoying a meal with friends, but we also need to be reminded that this is a repeated occupational exposure for those who are working in hospitality and serving drinks and food. “Now, as we’ve already seen, concentrations of second-hand smoke in these settings are generally low, and they’re likely to present a low risk to health for most healthy people. “But ... there’s no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and so any individual with pre-existing heart, lung or respiratory conditions may be particularly vulnerable even to low levels of exposure. “We know that second-hand smoke is its known carcinogen, and on that basis those exposed in the hospitality sector have a right to be protected. “On that basis, there’s a need to protect them, as there is anybody in any workplace setting from second-hand smoke exposure in all areas of workplaces and spaces.” Sean Semple, professor of exposure science at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said: “I think that if I were a policy-maker, which I am not, then I would be looking at those occupational exposures as well. “I have asthma, if I was being occupationally exposed to SHS (second-hand smoke), and knowing that I was one of a very small number of workers now being legally exposed to SHS in the workplace, then I might not be very happy about that.” A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan we are shifting focus from sickness to prevention, including tackling the harms of smoking and passive smoking. “The landmark Tobacco and Vapes Bill is the biggest public health intervention in a generation and will put us on track towards a smoke-free UK.”

Concerns raised over hospitality staff after smoking curbs ditchedConcerns have also been raised about the “renormalisation” of smoking. Dr Rachel O’Donnell, senior research fellow at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said restrictions on smoking in outdoor places can “reinforce” a message that smoking “isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do” and could also help smokers to kick the habit. In November, it emerged that the UK Government is to scrap plans to ban smoking in the gardens of pubs and restaurants in England. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the hospitality industry has “taken a real battering in recent years” and it is not “the right time” to ban smoking outside pubs. But smoking and vaping could be banned in other public places in England – such as in playgrounds or outside of schools – under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. According to the World Health Organisation, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure. In a briefing for journalists, Dr O’Donnell said decision-making “should be on the basis of all the evidence that’s available”. She added: “Any debate about legislation on smoking in outdoor settings shouldn’t only focus on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure levels, because the impacts of restrictions in outdoor settings are also evident on our social norms.” Smoke-free outdoor environments “reinforce smoke-free as the acceptable norm”, she said. “This, I think, is a critically important point at a time where in the media, over the last year, we’ve seen various reports and questions as to whether we might be on the cusp of renormalisation of smoking for various reasons, and so smoke-free public environments still have a critically important role to play. “If you reduce opportunities to smoke, it can also help individuals who smoke themselves to reduce the amount they smoke or to make a quit attempt.” Dr O’Donnell said visibility of tobacco products and smoking is a “form of marketing for tobacco companies” as she pointed to studies highlighting the increasing number of tobacco depictions on screen. She went on: “The more often young adults observe smoking around them, the more likely they are to believe that smoking is socially acceptable, which feeds back into this idea of renormalisation of smoking. “So, restrictions on smoking in outdoor public places have other positive knock-on effects, potentially for young people as well, just sending out that clear message that this isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do and see, and this could help to discourage smoking initiation among young people at quite a critical time.” On being exposed to second-hand smoke at work, she added: “I think sometimes when we think about exposure to second-hand smoke in outdoor settings, in pubs, in restaurants, we think about that sort of occasional customer exposure, the nuisance element of it when people are out enjoying a meal with friends, but we also need to be reminded that this is a repeated occupational exposure for those who are working in hospitality and serving drinks and food. “Now, as we’ve already seen, concentrations of second-hand smoke in these settings are generally low, and they’re likely to present a low risk to health for most healthy people. “But ... there’s no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and so any individual with pre-existing heart, lung or respiratory conditions may be particularly vulnerable even to low levels of exposure. “We know that second-hand smoke is its known carcinogen, and on that basis those exposed in the hospitality sector have a right to be protected. “On that basis, there’s a need to protect them, as there is anybody in any workplace setting from second-hand smoke exposure in all areas of workplaces and spaces.” Sean Semple, professor of exposure science at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said: “I think that if I were a policy-maker, which I am not, then I would be looking at those occupational exposures as well. “I have asthma, if I was being occupationally exposed to SHS (second-hand smoke), and knowing that I was one of a very small number of workers now being legally exposed to SHS in the workplace, then I might not be very happy about that.” A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan we are shifting focus from sickness to prevention, including tackling the harms of smoking and passive smoking. “The landmark Tobacco and Vapes Bill is the biggest public health intervention in a generation and will put us on track towards a smoke-free UK.”