SOPHY RIDGE, CO-HOST: Now, in the week ahead we were expecting the Government to make a major announcement on social media use for under 16s. We’ve had lots and lots of hints from Government on this program, the Technology Minister telling us yesterday, a total ban is still on the table, and also an attorney just 15 minutes or so ago, again, saying she would be very pleased if it was something that this Government decided to implement.

WILFRED FROST, CO-HOST: Of course, it's something Australia decided to do already six months ago. How's it all going and what could we learn from Australia? Delighted to say we're joined by Anika Wells the Australian Communications Minister. Anika, a very good afternoon, I guess, to you there - good morning from London. Thanks for joining us. So this is really, as Communication Minister, this is your ban. How's it going? 

MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS ANIKA WELLS: It's going pretty well. We think that it's already been a success in that we are now all having this global conversation about social media and the harms that it's having on our children and young people. We are six months into the ban being in effect in Australia. We've had more than five million social media accounts deactivated – that's a big deal for us because we only have 1.2 million Australians aged between 13 and 16. It speaks to the fact that lots of young people have multiple accounts and lots of young people are trying to find their way around the ban, which we expected. And we’ve always said that the onus here is on big tech to do the right thing and to remove these accounts, rather than it being a question or a fight between parents and kids in each household across Australia.

RIDGE: I've got to be honest with you. A lot of people who are against a ban here are using what they describe as the evidence from Australia to say, look, this doesn't work. Loads of kids are getting around it, so what's the point?

WELLS: Well, those people, I think, and their allies in big tech would like us to all talk about the fallibilities of the initiative because they don't want other countries follow in our footsteps. More than a dozen countries have announced that they will have a social media ban since we decided to do it and implemented it on 10 December last year – the UK is still considering it today. But of course, they want to throw doubt over the success of the measure – they don't want other countries to follow suit. 

But we know, both anecdotally and from the qualitative and quantitative data that we are collecting at eSafety, which is our equivalent of Ofcom here in Australia, that the ban is already being successful. And yeah, it's going to look untidy for the next three years. People who have had something taken away from them, a 15-year-old who has had accounts taken away from them, is always going to try and get back on. 

But my eyes are focused on the horizon and, in three years’, time there's going to be a generation of Australians who will never have a social media account until they turn 16, and that's the cultural change that we're moving towards.

FROST: You said there it's been untidy and would likely be untidy for a couple of years. Would it be, therefore, understandable for a country like the UK to take a little bit longer to learn from the untidiness that you're experiencing so that they can get it closer to perfect from the day that it gets announced? Or do you think you’d just crack on and do it yourselves?

WELLS: Absolutely not. As a parent of young children, I think we all live with untidiness as the modern existence, and every single day that you delay you are affecting the mental health and the outcomes of young people who are continuing to be addicted to social media online, these are harmful features. Endless scroll, disappearing messages, toxic popularity metres, the algorithm - we know that they are affecting people's mental health and that they are harmful. 

So, it's almost like product safety recall, you know, and we are confident that whilst it will be imperfect, and we never said it was going to be anything but imperfect, you can't fence the ocean, we can't control the internet – but you can police the sharks.

RIDGE: I think me and Wilf have some sympathy with the untidiness of parenthood.

FROST: It's the speed with which it gets untidy.

RIDGE: It's extraordinary.

FROST: Unbelievable.

RIDGE: You said in March this year that some big tech companies are failing to obey the laws, and I just wondered if we could unpick this a bit. Because I think what's interesting about the ban on social media is you're not trying to kind of criminalise parents, you're trying to put the onus on the tech companies, right? How easy or not has it been to get them to change their rules and, I guess, to hold them responsible if underage users are on their sites?

WELLS: I think I said they were ‘taking the mickey’ in that press conference that you might be quoting from. We did expect big tech to do the right thing. We expect big tech, if they're going to come and do business on Australian shores, to obey Australian laws – I think that's reasonable. But we do feel that they are doing the bare minimum to get by on these laws. And the eSafety Commissioner, who is our independent regulator in this space, is currently undertaking investigations to gather evidence about that.

FROST: I guess the way this is, as Sophy kind of alluded to, been framed a bit over here is people are getting around it, we're learning lessons, maybe it's not the right approach. Do you have a message to big tech about people that wonder whether you'll see it through, whether you'll back down at all?

WELLS: We're not backing down, we're going further. We will be introducing a digital duty of care to the Parliament later this year. A digital duty of care will capture a lot of the what-about’s that are in this discussion around the fallibility of a social media ban. It will change the whole balance of the system so that the onus will be on big tech to prevent harm from occurring in the first place systemically on their platforms rather than, at the moment, being a bit of a Wild Wild West – as President Macron would say – and the harm occurring and then it being on the individual person who suffered the harm or their parents – and I know that you've got some high profile cases in the UK – to try and take up and fight individually on their behalf. These are some of the biggest, richest, most resourced companies in the world. No individual parent should need to do that. We've got their backs and I would welcome the UK Government joining us. 

RIDGE: Really interesting to speak to you today. Thank you for joining us. I can't help but notice the signs you've got behind you. Is it a birthday in your house?

WELLS: Not today, but I have twin boys so there's a lot of art cycling through the office.

RIDGE: Love it. Love it. Great talk. Thanks very much for being with us.

WELLS: Thank you.

FROST: Anika Wells there, the Australian Communications Minister.