HDCA lessons ignored as Government pushes new online restrictions

Media Release | 12 November 2025 | For immediate release

Under-16 Social Media Ban a “open door for Surveillance and Censorship,” says PILLAR

HDCA lessons ignored as Government pushes new online restrictions

PILLAR Executive Director Nathan Seiuli warns that the proposed “Under-16 Social Media Ban” risks repeating the same mistakes as the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA), which he says has become “a weapon of surveillance and censorship.”

Following the headlines surrounding top cop Jevon McSkimming, PILLAR is calling on leaders to think carefully before pushing through laws that sound noble on paper but in practice are clumsy, invasive, and easily weaponised.

“The HDCA was sold as a way to protect children from harm online,” said Seiuli. “A decade later, it’s used to silence political opposition, bully outspoken individuals, and muzzle victims. The new B6416 ban is just the HDCA all over again. It won’t protect children, but it will expand government control over private life.”

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has backed a “two-track approach” to the proposal, yet there remains little detail about how it would work. “There’s no clarity on what will be defined as social media, how it will work, and who will enforce it” Seiuli said. “What we do know is that before a single child is protected, every user will have to surrender personal data.”

PILLAR has twice sought meetings with MP Cathrine Wedd, who is sponsoring the bill, but both were cancelled. “Her office has since said she’s too busy to meet, ever. For a back-bench MP, she seems busier than most Cabinet Ministers,” said Seiuli.

Seiuli warned that identification systems required under such bans are being misrepresented as secure. “Tell that to the 70,000 Discord users and 130 million Google users whose information was leaked. This isn’t safety, it’s state-sanctioned data harvesting.”

Countries that have adopted similar bans have seen VPN use surge by more than 200 percent, pushing users toward darker, unregulated corners of the internet. “Instead of empowering parents, this bill sidelines them,” said Seiuli. 

“We can protect children without sacrificing freedom or privacy. The answer isn’t more laws, it’s stronger families, better education, and targeted enforcement.”

ENDS