Prof Anne Twomey: Is the "ban" on under-16s from YouTube constitutionally valid?

"The first and most important point to make is that most of what you have been told by politicians about the ban is complete and utter rubbish." (Professor Emerita Anne Twomey)

There are a number of educational statements made during this video, by Professor Twomey.  For instance on peoples' right to freedom of political communication.

"The problem here is that disconnect between the aims and the effects of the law and how this interacts with the constitutionally implied freedom of political communication.

One argument that has been raised is that children under the age of 16 have no right to vote. So their communications are not protected by the implied freedom. There are two reasons why that's not the case. First, the implied freedom doesn't operate as a personal right. It's instead a limit on the legislative and executive power of the Commonwealth and the States. 

In short, it means that Parliament can't make laws that limit the freedom to engage in communication about political matters unless the law satisfies a test that has been laid down by the High Court. Second, the High Court held in unions New South Wales and New South Wales number one in 2013 that political communications by non voters such as unions, corporations, and non-citizens still fell within the scope of the implied freedom because they too operate within and are affected by the system of government and laws of this country.  

Moreover, young people, if they're citizens, will gain the right to vote when they turn 18. Political communications that they are exposed to or engage in when they are younger may very well influence the formation of their political views and how they vote in later life. 

For example, those who were young during the Vietnam War protests and the Whittam dismissal may have been influenced by those events when they later came to vote. Equally, young people today may be influenced by political communications about matters such as climate change when deciding how to vote in the future. So yes, if a law burdens the ability to engage in political communication, it will trigger the application of the implied freedom even though it affects people who are only under 16."