Mr. Toby Dagg:

Absolutely. All our complaint processes function in reasonably similar ways in terms of throughput. A person visits the safety commissioner website and we have a reporting page. Every page on the website allows a person to navigate to the report page via a prominent report abuse button in the right-hand corner. The person can then complete a complaint form specific to a complaint type. We are conscious of the need to ensure citizens are not put in a position of having to choose which door to go through. There are some similarities between schemes and we do not want people trying to diagnose their own form of online harm through a regulatory lens. We have separate forms set up for each of our complaint areas.

A person will tell us what is happening, such as the location of material, and if it is image-based it may be a URL on an adult or rogue site. They person will also include demographic information so we can prioritise and we prioritise complaints from young people, for example. Approximately 25% to 30% of image-based abuse complaints are made by young people. We collect as much evidence as we can up front and the report will generate an entry in our complaints management system. An investigator will pick that up and start to perform triage by reviewing the complaint and assigning priority. Any significant issues, sensitivities or risks will be raised with a manager and we will discuss some of the responses that should follow. In talking about human-centred harms, involving image-based abuse, cyberbullying and cyber abuse, there is invariably a phone call with a complainant in order to talk through additional details, gather additional evidence and starting to plan a response.

Once that response has been settled, we may have recourse to several regulatory options and these are anything from informal warnings to a perpetrator on a particular matter to options involving applying to the federal court for injunctions. These are not options we have had recourse to because as others have mentioned, much of our work is done very successfully at the informal end of the regulatory spectrum. There is a range of interventions that we can have regard to, depending on the severity of the matter presenting.