Erica Stanford says Government not pursuing VPN restriction as part of social media ban - after ACT rules it out
Tuesday, 7 July 2026
Education Minister Erica Stanford says she is not pursuing restrictions on Virtual Private Networks as part of her under-16 social media ban, soon after ACT said this would be a red line for it.
The Post reported on Tuesday morning that the Government was pursuing some kind of restriction on VPNs as part of its work on an under-16 social media ban, after being told by multiple sources with knowledge of the work that this was the case.
It had put this to Stanford’s office on Monday morning and not received any denial.
But on Tuesday morning, soon after ACT leader David Seymour made clear that ACT would never support such a move, Stanford’s office emailed The Post to say it was “not looking at restricting or banning VPNs”.
Read more:
Banning under-16s from social media won’t work – here’s what will
Social media ban for under-16s: MPs back new online regulator, raise VPN concerns
The Post understands NZ First is also dead-set against a VPN ban and wary of the under-16 ban in general.
A VPN ban would make the social media restrictions far harder to evade, but would also have huge privacy implications and make New Zealand an outlier among liberal democracies.
Stanford is currently designing the proposed ban after a simple National Party members’ bill banning under-16s from social media was retracted.
She has not yet taken her proposal to Cabinet and it is likely that when she does ACT will oppose the ban.
VPNs allow internet users to route their traffic through another server, usually located elsewhere. This allows an internet user in New Zealand to appear as an internet user in the United States, or anywhere else.
They are widely used as a privacy and security measure, but are also used to evade country-level restrictions, such as China’s blocking of Google and Facebook, or to access media content available only in other nations.
The majority report from the Education and Workforce select committee which considered social media harm suggested a VPN ban could be a way forward.
“We acknowledge there is well-founded concern that age restrictions on social media could be evaded by young people using VPNs,” the committee’s majority said.
“We recommend that this is an area for further exploration by the regulator.”
Asked for comment on Monday, Stanford’s office replied that the Government was making “good progress” on the bill, and noted no decisions had gone to Cabinet.
“We are making good progress. The legislation is being drafted now and will be introduced before the election. Social media is an extraordinary resource, but it comes with risks, and right now we aren’t managing the risks for our young people.
“This is about protecting young people from bullying, inappropriate content, and social media addiction.”
Seymour told The Post any ban of VPNs would be a “red line”.
“We have worked to be constructive in this Government and often gone along with policies we wouldn’t normally for the sake of unity, but banning VPNs would be a red line for the ACT Party.”
Civil liberties groups were strongly concerned about the proposal to restrict VPN usage when asked by The Post.
The NZ Council for Civil Liberties chairperson Thomas Beagle said the push to ban VPNs showcased how flawed the social media ban was.
“The Australian example shows that 80% of people under 16 have seen no major impact from the ban, with many of them faking their way past the checks or using VPNs to appear to be in another country. It seems that the next stage is to ban VPNs,” Beagle said.
“There is no technical way to implement a VPN ban short of a Chinese-style mass blocking, possibly coupled with a VPN licensing scheme, which is both oppressive and ridiculously unworkable. Do we really want to follow the Chinese example with NZ Police stopping people in the street so that they can search their phone for illegal VPN software?”
Jillaine Heather, CEO of the Free Speech Union, said that VPN bans were generally something only repressive states engaged in.
“There is a reason the only countries that ban VPNs are China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and Belarus. Privacy tools are the first thing an authoritarian state comes for. New Zealand should not be auditioning to join that list to enforce a ban that is already failing,” she said.
“For a year the Government has told us the U-16 social ban was about keeping children safe. A VPN ban gives the game away. You do not need to control what adults do online to protect a 14-year-old. Banning the privacy tools that journalists, whistleblowers and abuse survivors rely on has nothing to do with children and everything to do with control.“
Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, has been asked for comment.