When Communications Minister Anika Wells appeared on television on Sunday to put the case for the government's digital duty of care bill, she did not just offer the opposition an olive branch.
Yet, rather than negotiating a mutually acceptable compromise, Angus Taylor's Coalition effectively chose to chop it down. The opposition has rejected the legislation before the ink on the exposure draft even dried.
By refusing to engage with a framework that holds tech giants accountable for algorithmic harms, the Coalition has missed an opportunity to show that it operates as a mature, alternative government - its best answer to the rise of One Nation.
The draft laws spell out online conduct that constitutes serious harm and give the minister the power to designate more serious harm that tech platforms must mitigate. The measures aim to shift responsibility onto big tech to proactively reduce foreseeable harm or face fines of more than $100 million.
Opposition figures have raised concerns about the "defects" in the bill and Mr Taylor said it was a "blank cheque for political censorship".
Given the draft bill now delegates the definition of harm to a regulator, questions about possible government overreach are legitimate.
The much-touted "My Feed, My Way" initiative does not empower the government to censor content.
If Mr Taylor worries that a minister under the new laws would hold too much discretionary power, the parliamentary solution sits in plain sight.