ACMA blacklist costs $400,000 to run

By Ben Grubb on Jan 13, 2010 1:01 PM
Filed under Telco/ISP

And likely to increase.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) spent just over $400,000 in 2008-9 to investigate complaints against internet content and take action on prohibited content hosted overseas.

The figure was revealed in a yet-to-be-published answer to a question on notice from Greens Party Senator Scott Ludlam.

Ludlam had requested the ACMA reveal the total amount it had budgeted for internet content regulation - specifically the maintenance of the ACMA blacklist - at a Senate Estimates hearing last year.

ACMA responded this week with a figure of $424,000 for the period 2008-9. A table of previous year's costs was also included [see below].

The figures were understood to be a proportional estimate of the total budget committed to the administrative unit within ACMA that was responsible for online content complaint handling.

ACMA's budget was expected to increase once the Federal Government introduced mandatory ISP-level filtering of refused classification material.

A web page on the Department of Broadband web site stated the Federal Government will assist the ACMA by giving it additional funding to "enhance the security of the RC Content list" (a portion of the ACMA blacklist) and "automate its distribution" so that ISPs did not have to use manual methods for updating the list.

Year	Online content complaint handling cost ($m)
2005-6	0.304
2007-8	0.442
2008-9	0.424
Total	1.411

10 comments in this discussion

"The anti-filter lobby (which I think is made up of about 10 posters on this website and the weirdo who even bothered to create an "anti-filter" site himself) would be the first to whinge and whine ..."

By Digger11

Tags

acma blacklist, australian communications and media authority, online content

ACMA eyes Telstra microwave spectrum for broadband

Govt considers more mobile emissions checks

Convergence review calls for online access overhaul

ACMA cold on revised customer service code

Breaking Stories

Australia shares $2bn Square Kilometre Array

NSW retains right to veto data centre co-tenants

Optus to launch federated APAC cloud

NBN Co expands wireless trials

Aussie unis flock to international video service

Comments: 10

Thysce Jan 13, 2010 4:32 PM	$400k down the drain...
cw Jan 13, 2010 5:23 PM	$400K is just the beginning of the cost. How much has been paid to Enex to test the IIA approved filters are compliant? How much has been spent on reports by Enex on testing Internet censorship solutions? The live trial recently and previous closed environment testing and the like even before that? Some of the above is covered by the $800K renewed contract awarded to Enex last year. So that takes it up to around $1.2M. The question asked in Senate estimates appears to not be the one answered. According to Hansard the questions asked was, check page ECA127 here http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S12489.pdf "Senator LUDLAM— I will leave that there. You will probably need to provide this on notice to us, but I am wondering whether you can provide us with a figure in 2009 dollars of the total amount that ACMA has spent since 1999—in the last 10 years—on internet content regulation." It was about the cost of content regulation, not blacklist maintenance. Blacklist maintenance is a small portion of the cost of ongoing government Internet content regulation. That would include what I have mentioned above plus more.
saveus Jan 13, 2010 10:47 PM	We the Labor Government believe the community is very worried about the high level of crime being committed everywhere around them. We therefore propose that every citizen, both adult & child, undergo a painless surgical procedure on their eyes that reduces their vision down to about 3 metres in front of them. As a result, most people won't be able to see any crimes happening around them. We're not saying crime won't still be happening, but we can 100% guarantee that you and your children won't be exposed to it or the pain and trauma caused. If you're against this procedure obviously you're a criminal trying to use superior eyesight to commit crimes against the blind majority. Getting a prescription for spectacles may mostly restore your damaged eyesight, but we don't think most people would seek that. We know this procedure will be effective because we tested a group by wearing very dark sunglasses for a while and they all said they couldn't see many crimes taking place. The effect on their normal everyday activities such as watching TV or reading was negligible.
Creationist Jan 14, 2010 9:04 AM	What you guys are lamenting about here? Normal operation of an average IT Security department in any bank would cost much more than $400,000 annually. $400,000 would probably be spent on simple user accounts management and access security every year, not mentioning other activities IT Security is usually engaged in...
ITrant Jan 14, 2010 10:28 AM	Excellent comparison. The government's internet filtering operates with the morals of a bank, too. Serious reform is required on both fronts.
Digger11 Jan 14, 2010 4:51 PM	So 18c per year per person. or 0.005c per day. We should all be outraged.
Maxxi Jan 14, 2010 11:10 PM	Question ITrant: Do you use one or more banks? lol, moot question... I know some excellent IT folks in Australian banks, who would be disappointed that some think so lowly of them...
Maxxi Jan 14, 2010 11:13 PM	Hey saveus, your comment reminded me of a very good optical example of some anti-filter folks: With their heads stuck firmly in the sand, they keep on claiming: "There is no problem that needs fixing...!" Hmmmmmm.....
Daveh Jan 18, 2010 11:06 AM	Just an interesting reminder. What happens when people being pushing all kinds of RC content from Google, YouTube and Wikipedia onto the ACMA? A cursory search over YouTube found large numbers of items which would be RC within Aus. Moreover Google cache provides an easy work around and Wikipedia provides content which is RC (methods of drug use, methods of drug manufacture, methods of euthanasia). Will the ACMA do what it is obliged to do and block these websites?
Digger11 Jan 18, 2010 1:16 PM	The anti-filter lobby (which I think is made up of about 10 posters on this website and the weirdo who even bothered to create an "anti-filter" site himself) would be the first to whinge and whine and complain if ,say for instance, they walked into Myer and there were people having sex in the perfume section, people shooting up Herion in menswear and whatever else. Good on the government for this legislation - it is greatly needed by the vast majority of us law abiding citizens.