Ms Fiona Jennings:

On defining harmful communications, and the exercise that is before the committee, we would refer to the consultation the Law Reform Commission had with the young people and the different themes, issues and behaviours that they identified as harmful. The Law Reform Commission brought that information, along with the extended consultations it had, and it looked at issues such as the taking and distribution of an intimate images without consent, the setting up of false accounts to cause or intend to cause harm, and stalking or actions that would cause alarm, distress and harm. As Mr. Church said earlier, we would encourage the committee to create a definition that is not overly broad and which is workable. In Australia, the Enhancing Online Safety Act 2015 pertains to cyberbullying but it also has quite a niche definition that covers material that is seriously threatening, seriously intimidating, seriously harassing or seriously humiliating. New Zealand has a Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015. New Zealand does not have an entity such as our Digital Protection Commissioner. It has an approved agency called Netsafe. The New Zealand legislation looks communications principles, including where a digital communication should not be threatening, intimidating or menacing, and should not be used to harass an individual. There are several other principles also and I believe they would be a good starting point when looking to create a definition of harmful communications.