Democracy Undermined:

Senate Manipulation and Questionable Witness Selection in the Online Safety Bill Hearing

by @Kurtviews (see original thread)

”We Have No Chance!

@Kurtviews, after an exhaustive investigation into parliamentary documents, committee records, and stakeholder submissions, has uncovered a deeply troubling pattern of deliberate manipulation surrounding the November 25th hearing on the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024.

The evidence points to a carefully orchestrated process designed to suppress opposition and rubber-stamp predetermined outcomes. The Australian government is rushing this bill through with a process seemingly crafted to ensure its passage while minimizing genuine scrutiny.

---

Cherry-Picked Witnesses

The witness list reveals a clear pattern of bias:

• Project Rockit: Received $614,377 through an eSafety Commission-administered grant program.

• Professor Susan Sawyer and Dr. Danielle Einstein: Hold government-funded academic positions with no record of direct submissions to the previous Online Safety Bill.

• Headspace Representatives: Major recipients of government funding, with no demonstrated expertise in youth consultation.

As Dr. Michael Carr-Gregg noted during Senate Debates in November 2024:
"The selection of witnesses demonstrates a clear preference for those with existing ties to government bodies."

---

Senate's Unprecedented Mandate

In an unusual and concerning move, the Senate directly mandated specific witnesses, predominantly selecting government-funded organizations and academics. This level of interference in committee witness selection is highly irregular and raises serious questions about the independence of the process.

Senator Andrew Bragg highlighted this irregularity:
"The decision to rely on government-funded organizations creates a perception of bias in the stakeholder selection process."

---

Silencing Dissent

Conspicuously absent from the witness list are:

• Youth advocacy groups

• Parent organizations

• Digital rights experts

• Independent researchers

• Constitutional law specialists

Senator Dorinda Cox stated in a media release:
"There was no engagement with grassroots organizations working directly with children, despite their frontline experience."

---

Violating Rights and Freedoms

The bill and its flawed process appear to violate:

• The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly freedom of expression, association, and the right to be heard.

• Democratic principles of participation and representation.

• The right to political communication and public discourse.

The Australian Human Rights Commission warned in October 2024:
"Political discourse, particularly for young Australians, increasingly takes place online; limiting access undermines democratic participation."

---

A Complicit Committee Chair

Senator Karen Grogan’s role warrants scrutiny:

• Misleading claims about witness selection from previous submissions.

• Failure to ensure diverse representation.

• Apparent conflict of interest due to strong party loyalty.

Professor George Williams cautioned during a Parliamentary Joint Committee hearing in November 2024:
"Restricting access to platforms under the age of 16 risks silencing voices that have historically driven social movements and influenced public policy."

---

A Timeline of Injustice

The bill’s rushed timeline raises significant red flags:

• Thursday, November 21: Bill referred to the committee.

• Friday, November 22: One-day submission window closes.

• Monday, November 25: Public hearing.

• Tuesday, November 26: Committee report due.

Senator David Pocock criticized the timeline during Senate Debates in November 2024:
"The rushed timeline has left significant gaps in consultation with community groups and experts."

This compressed schedule makes it impossible for the committee to:

• Properly read and analyze submissions.

• Prepare informed questions.

• Consider diverse perspectives.

• Contact additional witnesses.

As Professor Julian Savulescu noted during a Parliamentary Committee hearing:
"Compressed timelines limit the ability to scrutinize proposed measures effectively."

---

A Call to Action

Australians should be alarmed that critical legislation is being pushed through with such utter disregard for proper process and representative participation. The government seems intent on denying young people their fundamental rights and curtailing democratic discourse.

This bill and the undemocratic process behind it represent a clear threat to participatory democracy. We must demand better.”
by @Kurtviews

(Comment: These bills are following this stated roadmap to adhere to WEF’s Agenda 2030 goals.)