Labour backs under-16 social media ban bill, giving it cross-party support as coalition partners object

Labour leader Chris Hipkins has written to Education Minister Erica Stanford confirming Labour will support the under-16s social media ban bill through its early stages in Parliament, giving the government bill cross-party backing even as National's own coalition partners lined up to criticise the handling of the legislation (RNZ).

Stanford announced the bill's introduction to Parliament on Monday without a guarantee of Labour's backing. She learned of Labour's support from reporters on Tuesday afternoon, telling them she had not yet read Hipkins' letter. Hipkins said Labour discussed the bill at caucus on Tuesday morning before confirming the party's position (RNZ).

The bill will not get its first reading before the election. A first reading is the initial vote Parliament takes on a bill to decide whether it proceeds to a select committee for closer examination. There is not enough time left in the parliamentary sitting calendar, meaning the legislation will sit on the order paper — Parliament's agenda of pending business — waiting for the next Parliament to pick it up (RNZ).

The legislation went through Cabinet and was introduced under a minister's authority, making it a government bill rather than a member's bill (which is introduced by an individual MP). It puts the onus on social media platforms to take "reasonable steps" to verify that users are over the minimum age (RNZ; NZ Herald).

ACT and NZ First, both coalition partners in government, have long opposed the ban and used the bill's introduction to sharpen their criticism. NZ First leader Winston Peters said the prime minister showed a lack of understanding of how the system works. ACT leader David Seymour said National has been "a bit panicked" in recent weeks over the social media ban (RNZ).

Both minor parties have cited privacy concerns and argued the proposal does not go far enough to keep under-16s safe online (NZ Herald). ACT has previously described the proposed ban as "insane" and Seymour used his speech at Rally '26 on 28 June to criticise "knee-jerk attempts to ban social media" (ACT; ACT).

The select committee report from the parliamentary inquiry into online harm and young people, completed in March, recommended banning social media for under-16s and introducing age verification. A select committee is a small group of MPs who examine bills and issues in detail and hear public submissions. ACT said at the time it was concerned by recommendations moving towards a ban (Parliament select committee report). The inquiry also recommended progressing work to consider restricting social media access for under-16-year-olds (Parliament).

Labour has separately called for clear rules to control deepfake technology and a ban on "nudify" apps, citing real risks to young people's privacy and safety (Labour Party). The Education and Workforce select committee also received a petition from the Before16 Charitable Trust calling for online safety legislation for children and a ban on social media until age 16 (Parliament).

The broader political context here matters. National has introduced a government bill that its own partners oppose, and those partners are now publicly attacking both the policy and the prime minister's handling of it. Peters's comment that the prime minister lacks understanding of how the system works is pointed: the bill cannot pass before the election, so the introduction is largely a positioning exercise. National gets to say it has acted on online safety; ACT and NZ First get to distance themselves from a ban their voters are sceptical of.

Labour's decision to support the bill at select committee stage adds another layer. Hipkins is giving Stanford the votes to progress the legislation through its early parliamentary stages, but without a first reading before the election, that support is conditional on what the select committee process produces. If Labour forms the next government, or holds the balance of power, the shape the bill takes after public submissions will matter more than its introduction this week.

For parties and advisers watching the order paper, the practical reality is straightforward. The bill exists, it has Labour's backing for select committee stage, and it will not move further until after the election. What happens then depends on the composition of the next Parliament and whether the coalition tensions on display this week harden into outright opposition.