Skip to main content


We need you to write to your Member of Parliament and tell them:

  • We believe in better online safety, but we oppose the government rushing through laws that invites Big Tech to snoop through our profiles, peek at our DMs and decide what is decent or not.
  • This law makes the internet a minefield for LGBTQ+ people. It destroys safe online spaces, ends privacy for those exploring their identity, and censors LGBTQ+ content.
  • The government should only use Age Verification technology that is effective and protects our rights to privacy and free speech.

Politicians must see the damage this law is about to unleash, and bin the age verification rules that punishes adults and unfairly targets marginalised communities.



Email Your MP

Select your constituency:

Subject: Your Subject Here

Dear [MP's Name],

Your message here.

[Your Name]


I am writing as your constituent to express my deep concerns about the implementation of the Online Safety Act, particularly the age verification clauses, due to the potential privacy and equality issues they may pose.

Evidence indicates that newly proposed large-scale age verification technologies for ID verification are ineffective, introduce significant privacy risks, and often rely on untested technology – vulnerable to bad actors. This is especially concerning given the availability of more robust and established verification measures, such as device-based and internet service provider verification, to confirm the age of users.

The increasing cases of identity theft and fraud underscore the huge vulnerability of online data. It is crucial to note that the potential establishment of an extensive age verification system without robust security measures could inadvertently create a hackable dataset. This dataset, if breached, could become a prime target for scammers and blackmailers, endangering the privacy and safety of countless individuals.

The Australian government’s reluctance to enforce age verification, citing privacy concerns and the technology’s ‘lack of maturity,’ aligns with the caution advocated by the British Computer Society (BCS). Both emphasise the need for a thoughtful approach, considering the inherent issues and potential privacy risks associated with age verification technologies. This echoes the call for a more comprehensive and cautious regulatory framework for online safety.

I agree with campaigners from SACK THE ACT! who assert that mandatory age verification, as currently proposed, has the potential to lead to severe privacy breaches and compromise the safety of individuals. The risks associated with such age verification methods extend beyond mere security threats, as there are concerns about the potential sale of private information and the absence of adequate privacy regulations.

Like many commentators on this issue, I believe efforts should pivot towards comprehensive education, robust digital literacy programs, guidance on relationships and sex education (RSE), and enhanced support for caregivers.

Furthermore, the potential unintended consequences of age verification, such as driving children toward more dangerous online spaces, must be carefully considered.

The risk of age verification proving ineffective and pushing young individuals towards easily accessible technologies like the Dark Web, where they may encounter harmful content, is a genuine concern.

Banning VPNs and IP masking technologies also raises risks, threatening the safety and privacy of content creators. Restricting these tools may inadvertently expose content creators to potential harm by revealing their locations and compromising their physical safety.

Additionally, the Act’s potential to ‘out’ LGBTQ+ individuals, who may access websites requiring identity verification, poses a direct threat to their safety and privacy. This concern is underscored by the fact that protecting the anonymity of LGBTQ+ individuals enables them to freely share their experiences and sexuality while maintaining their privacy. The risk of ‘outing’ through mandatory identity verification jeopardizes their safety and creates a serious issue for those who, for various reasons, are not public about their sexual and gender identities.

Given these pressing issues, I urge you to call on Ofcom and ministers to reconsider and implement alternative systems that do not involve the creation of new data, such as exploring content filtering at the device or internet service provider level. Moreover, the proposed legislation appears inadequate in addressing the fundamental causes of online safety issues for children. This must change – and fast.

It is deeply concerning that these real-life concerns have been lacking from debates so far. I urge you to voice these concerns to ministers and regulators before it is too late.

Yours sincerely