Government denies it’s looking to ban or restrict VPNs

Tuesday, 7 July 2026

The Government has denied it is considering banning or restricting the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) as part of its work on reducing social media harm.

Plans exploring a ban on VPNs were first revealed by The Post’s political editor, Henry Cooke, citing multiple sources, but asked for comment by Stuff, Education Minister Erica Stanford’s office responded: “The Government is not looking at restricting or banning VPNs”.

Stanford is currently working on broader legislation to reduce harm to young people on social media after a members bill proposing a ban for under 16s similar to the one now implemented in Australia was de-prioritised.

The original bill faced criticism from both the Green and ACT parties over issues of potential overreach and enforcement feasibility.

ACT has pledged to prevent any VPN ban.

'The Government is united in condemning China’s missile launch, and to be consistent it’s critical we don’t adopt Chinese-style intrusions into internet privacy,“ ACT Leader David Seymour said this morning.

'If a teenager can bypass a social media ban with a VPN, then the ban isn't effective. If the Government responds by restricting VPNs, it is no longer regulating children's access to social media, it is regulating how every New Zealander uses the internet.“

The push back to any VPN ban or restriction is cross-parliamentary, with Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick telling Stuff it would have “perverse consequences”.

“There are far more sensible ways to try and approach this as an issue and there are understandably concerns from civil rights groups” she said. “It is not the appropriate way to go about trying stop harm occurring online for younger people.”

Labour’s technology spokesman Reuben Davidson said they supported age restrictions for social media, “but banning VPNs isn't the way to make them work'.

Why the Government would look to restrict VPNs

Banning VPNs would make evading social media restrictions much more difficult, as they are the easiest way of disguising your country of origin when going online.

Evidence emerging from Australia that the social media ban that has been in place there for over six months is being circumvented by young people.

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner reports that two-thirds of the target demographic remain active on supposedly-banned platforms.

Budget 2026 included $30 million in new spending over the next four years to “develop policy and possible regulatory options to improve children’s online safety, subject to future policy and funding decisions”.

The Education and Workforce Select Committee’s majority report acknowledged “well-founded concern that age restrictions on social media could be evaded by young people using VPNs” and recommended VPN restriction as “an area for further exploration by the regulator”.

The Free Speech Union criticised the idea, with chief executive Jillaine Heather saying a VPN ban would be the “most significant expansion of state control over online speech and digital freedom in New Zealand’s history”.

“The Government wants the power to prohibit technologies New Zealanders use every day, because those technologies make it harder for the state to control what we see and say online. That is not child protection, it is censorship infrastructure.”

How VPNs work

VPNs work by routing your web traffic through a server located in a different country, making your traffic appear as if it is coming from elsewhere.

While they are often used to access media licensed to other countries they also widely implemented in professional settings.

When accessing a VPN, your personal information, such as passwords or any identifying data, is scrambled and encrypted.

Businesses often use VPNs to protect sensitive information and journalists use them to protect confidential sources.

Stanford has said she will introduce her own Government Bill in the coming weeks, although it will seemingly not include VPN restrictions.

New Zealand Children’s Commissioner Dr Claire Achmad says whatever those regulatory options include, a straight ban is the wrong approach.

“A blanket ban for all children and young people under the age of 16 is quite a blunt instrument, and we need to think carefully about what will actually prevent harm to children and young people,' Achmad told Stuff.

She argued that simply restricting access doesn’t make the internet safer. For some children—especially those in LGBTIQA+ and marginalised communities—it could actually increase harm.