The new law holds social media platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X, and Instagram accountable for ensuring that users under the age of 16 are not able to create accounts. Failure to comply with this regulation could result in substantial fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars (approximately $33 million).
The Senate passed the bill with a vote of 34 to 19, following the House of Representatives' overwhelming approval of 102 to 13 on Wednesday.
While the House still needs to ratify amendments made by the Senate, this is expected to be a mere formality, as the government has indicated its support for these changes.
The platforms will have a year to devise strategies for implementing the ban before any penalties take effect.
The amendments enhance privacy protections, prohibiting platforms from requiring users to submit government-issued identification, such as passports or driver's licenses, or to use a government system for digital identification.
The House is set to approve these amendments on Friday. Critics of the law express concerns that restricting social media access for young children may infringe on the privacy of users who need to verify their age.
Although the major political parties back the ban, numerous child welfare and mental health advocates warn of potential negative repercussions.
Senator David Shoebridge from the minority Greens party stated that mental health professionals agree the ban could lead to increased isolation for many children who rely on social media for support.
"This policy will disproportionately affect vulnerable young individuals, particularly in regional areas and within the LGBTQI community, by severing their connections," Shoebridge remarked in the Senate.
Opposition Senator Maria Kovacic characterized the bill as essential rather than extreme.
"The primary objective of this legislation is straightforward: it requires social media companies to take reasonable measures to identify and remove underage users from their platforms," Kovacic stated in the Senate.
This is a duty that these companies should have addressed long ago, yet they have consistently neglected these obligations in pursuit of profit, she remarked.
Sonya Ryan, an advocate for online safety whose 15-year-old daughter Carly was tragically murdered by a 50-year-old predator posing as a teenager online, characterized the Senate vote as a "historic milestone in safeguarding our children from terrible dangers online."
"It's too late for my daughter, Carly, and for the many other children who have endured immense suffering or lost their lives in Australia, but let us unite in their memory and move forward together," she expressed in an email to the AP.
Wayne Holdsworth, whose teenage son Mac took his own life after being a victim of an online sextortion scheme, supported the age restriction and felt a sense of pride in its approval.
"I have always taken pride in being Australian, but following today's Senate decision, I am filled with an even greater sense of pride," Holdsworth shared in an email to the AP.
Christopher Stone, executive director of Suicide Prevention Australia, the governing body for the suicide prevention sector, criticized the legislation for overlooking the beneficial aspects of social media in enhancing young people's mental health and fostering connections.
"The government is carelessly rushing into this legislation without proper consideration. Young Australians deserve policies grounded in evidence, not hasty decisions," Stone stated.
The platforms had expressed concerns that the law would be impractical and had requested the Senate to postpone the vote until at least June of next year, when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies would provide insights on how to effectively protect young children.
Critics contend that the government is trying to persuade parents that it is safeguarding their children in the lead-up to the general election scheduled for May. The administration aims to gain voter support by addressing parental concerns regarding children's social media addiction. However, some believe that the proposed legislation may inflict more damage than it mitigates.
Concerns raised include the hasty passage of the legislation through Parliament without sufficient examination, its potential ineffectiveness, privacy threats to all users, and the erosion of parental authority in making decisions for their children.
Additionally, opponents claim that the ban could lead to the isolation of children, stripping them of the beneficial aspects of social media, pushing them towards the dark web, discouraging younger children from reporting harmful content, and diminishing the motivation for platforms to enhance online safety measures.