Political parties address internet filter concerns

 

ACL identifies parties’ positions on mandatory and voluntary filtering.

Eight political parties hopeful of gaining seats in Election 2010 have responded to a survey by the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) that canvassed policy positions on ACMA content classification and ISP-level filtering.

The parties to respond included Australian Labor Party (ALP), the Liberal-National Coalition and a number of minor parties.

Parties took a range of positions on the incumbent Labor Government's mandatory filtering proposal - with some opposed, some supportive, and others proposing voluntary filtering measures.

The Christian Democratic Party "fully [supported] the filtering of RC [refused classification] material at the ISP level to protect children.

"Self-regulation is not working," the Christian Democratic Party stated. "A new scheme is required. Serious breaches should result in loss of license for the broadcaster."

Socially conservative Family First stated that it was "one of the first groups to begin the campaign for tighter regulation of RC material."

While it did not directly reject Labor's mandatory filtering proposal, the party appeared to support a voluntary regime, stating: "Family First ... welcomes industry moves to voluntarily block certain RC content.

"However, it also recognises that it [filtering] is not a complete solution. New technologies, including peer-to-peer networks which cannot be filtered, remain an ongoing challenge.

"Ultimately, parents must be responsible for monitoring their children's internet use and be provided with the tools and information required to do so."

The Liberal National Coalition used ACL's survey as a platform to berate Labor for scrapping the previous Liberal Government's voluntary NetAlert filtering scheme.

"The best internet filter a child can have is a parent that is engaged in what their children do and see on the internet," the Coalition stated.

Speaking to iTnews on camera last week, Liberal MP Paul Fletcher would not discuss whether or not NetAlert, or any form of voluntary filtering, would be revived under an elected Liberal Government.

Similarly, the Coalition's statement to the ACL did not suggest or rule out any mandatory or voluntary measures beyond that Labor's proposal may not be effective.

"The Coalition supports sensible and workable measures to protect children from illegal or inappropriate content," it stated.

"Ultimately, it will be a range of measures such as strong and well-funded online policing, support for teachers and parents, international cooperation and technology options that will keep our children safe in an online world."

The Non-Custodial Parents Party was more direct in putting the onus on parents to keep their children from accessing undesirable content.

"The internet should be determined by the parents and not by the Government," it stated.

"Our party would support the provision of commercial filtering products for parents to protect children from legal but otherwise harmful internet content."

Neither the Australian Greens nor the Australian Sex Party had responded to the ACL's queries.

While, Greens Senator Scott Ludlam has been an outspoken opponent of "mandatory net censorship", the Greens declined to participate in the ACL survey, stating: “This group [the ACL] don’t actually represent any churches, and won’t disclose where their funding comes from.

"The answers to all of the questions in the survey they conducted this year are available on our website and as they are not a real representative body they were not provided a full response to their survey."

One of the policies on the Sex Party's website is "to overturn mandatory ISP filtering of the Internet and return Internet censorship to parents and individuals".

The Climate Sceptics Party was "strongly opposed", claiming that "this presents a serious danger to freedom of speech ... we support voluntary internet safety measures."

Meanwhile, the incumbent Australian Labor Party reiterated its commitment to "education, law enforcement, research and mandatory ISP filtering of RC content", noting that there was "no silver bullet approach to cyber-safety".

Labor's filtering legislation has not yet been introduced to Parliament. Early last month, it announced that it would delay introducing a mandatory filtering regime until a proposed review of RC guidelines is completed.

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Political parties address internet filter concerns
"ask 90% of high school students and they will tell you how to get around the filter as they do a good job of getting around the DET filtering which is much tougher than the one proposed"
By Ice
 
 
 
Comments: 8
Sams
Aug 5, 2010 7:12 PM
I seem to remember that when The Wilderness Society did comparisons between political parties like this, they were threatened with the removal of their charity tax breaks. I wonder if the ACL will escape from such scrutiny.
peterniss
Aug 6, 2010 7:24 AM
I usually dont have any time for the ACL but now they have done me a service in showing who is against the filter which will make my voting so much easier. Now I can safely vote against it in the upcomming election. And to think I was going to vote early today because i'm overseas and didnt know the Libs are now opposing it. Fantastic. Thanks ACL, you knuckleheads. HAHA
Bourkie
Aug 6, 2010 9:03 AM
>>> the incumbent Australian Labor Party reiterated ... noting that there was "no silver bullet approach to cyber-safety".

Shows just how make-believe their dogmatic fundamentalist view of the world is - they always refer to silver bullets which relate to Werewolves, witches, and monsters LOL!

Good one Conroy - it's great when you don't need any assistance highlighting your own repetitive stupidity!
ejobrien
Aug 6, 2010 10:08 AM
While this survey may be somewhat helpful in identifying which parties support (or not) the filter. I can completely understand why The Greens refused to participate. The ACL should not be given all the recognition and publicity that it gets. It should not have anywhere near the political influence that it clearly has.
Just keep in mind which party has been the most vocal opponent of the filter from the very beginning. It certainly wasn't the coalition. They've simply jumped on the 'no-filter' bandwagon because they realise there are votes in it. The Greens are the only party that have always been a vocal and consistent opponent of the filter. Even if The ALP get re-elected, the greens will do whatever they can to block the filter.
The coalition is an inherently religious party, particularly with their current leader. If you want a government free from religious interference, then the coalition is not a safe choice.
RaTTyRaTT
Aug 6, 2010 10:12 AM
Perhaps in this point I can say in all honesty: Thank you LORD for showing me which parties NOT to vote for... Any that are in FAVOUR of mandatory filtering have LOST my VOTE bigtime!!! As a christian - I DO NOT stand for mandatory filtering and the ACL is not speaking for moi!! (nor many other people I know.) What is a shame is the amount of people who do stand with the ACL, but out of ignorance - not because they really understand.
anonymous
Aug 6, 2010 11:01 AM

@Sams - you've got a good point about "charity" tax exemption for lobbyists. Why should taxpayers subsidise such activities when some of these appear to be contrary to any rational application of the public interest test?

Perhaps the ACL qualifies for tax exemption because it is classified as a religious organisation, in which case the whole system needs a public debate.
Ice
Aug 6, 2010 12:30 PM
only 1 thing to say vote against the filter no NBN or a best the weak excuse that the Libs are pushing forward which only benefits large towns and cities and no businesses in rural Australia
Ice
Aug 6, 2010 12:31 PM
ask 90% of high school students and they will tell you how to get around the filter as they do a good job of getting around the DET filtering which is much tougher than the one proposed
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australian miners send drones to work
In-depth: Unmanned aerial vehicles in the resources sector.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  19%
 
No
  81%
TOTAL VOTES: 509

Vote