By Kat Wong and Tess Ikonomou in Canberra

The future of a social media ban has become less clear as opposition politicians defy their leader’s position and make their concerns known.

A federal government proposal to ban children under 16 from accessing social media platforms like Snapchat, TikTok and Instagram is expected to be debated in Parliament on Tuesday.

Though the world-leading proposal has received bipartisan support, and strong backing specifically from Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, there is some dissent within coalition ranks.

“This is a test for Peter Dutton, about his leadership,” cabinet minister Amanda Rishworth told the Today Show.

Nationals politicians have expressed worries over privacy issues relating to age verification with Senator Matt Canavan noting this would affect all social media users.

“You’re going to have to verify everyone’s age and so there’s huge privacy and free speech implications,” he told ABC radio.

The bill doesn’t require social media companies to destroy information, according to Senator Canavan, and the way users provide digital consent is often a rushed process, which breeds concerns about the way people hand over their information.

There are also serious questions about whether the change will keep children off social media.

“Despite the good intentions behind this bill, it may be completely ineffective or worse,” Senator Canavan said.

“If we make clumsy hurdles for social media use, my eight-year-old will be able to get around them, but your 80-year-old grandma won’t.”

Fellow Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie added that the use of digital ID was worrying to some, though the government had ruled out its use in age assurance.

The coalition has said it would reserve its final decision on the bill until answers had been received from the government, though concerns have arisen over the legislation’s rushed consultation process.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland introduced the reform to parliament on Thursday, which she said would make the online environment better for young people.

The consultation period for groups and individuals to make submissions closed a day later on Friday.

A senate committee on Monday held a one-day hearing and is due to report back on Tuesday.

In submissions to the inquiry, a number of groups, including social media companies, pointed to the short notice period.

Snap Inc, which runs Snapchat, wrote the “the extremely compressed timeline” had allowed stakeholders little more than 24 hours to provide a response which “severely” constrained thorough analysis and informed debate.

X, formerly Twitter, also criticised the “unreasonably short time-frame of one day”.

Meta, which owns Facebook, wrote there had been “minimal consultation or engagement” and urged the government to wait for the results of the age assurance trial before progressing with the legislation.

TikTok said despite the “time-limited review” there were a range of “serious, unresolved problems” that the government must clarify to ensure there wouldn’t be unintended consequences.

Given the widespread support for the ban, Senator Canavan insists there is no need to rush analysis.

The Greens and some independents have opposed the ban and called on the government to address social media harms through other paths like implementing a statutory duty of care on tech giants.

“The problem with a ban is that you’re basically letting the platforms off the hook,” independent MP Zoe Daniel told ABC.

“We need to get the platforms to take responsibility for what is in their environment.”