Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

A news poll commissioned by the Australia Institute in 2003 surveyed parents with children aged 12 to 17. It found that 85 per cent were concerned about their children seeing pornography on the internet, 75 per cent said the federal government should be doing more and 93 per cent expressed support for mandatory filtering of internet pornography. Labor Party policy for mandatory filtering at ISP level is the strongest action we could and should take in this country to protect our kids. Even those who believe that adults have the right to view legal content in their homes would not accept taxpayer funded facilities such as public libraries being used for that purpose, especially when in a public facility children could be easily exposed to this material. In a particular library in my electorate, children are being exposed to this material because of the lack of a cohesive policy in this area.

Last year 62 members of the federal coalition signed a letter to the Prime Minister—and the member for Sturt may have been one of those who signed this petition—calling for a ban on the access to pornographic, violent and other inappropriate material via the internet. Senator Helen Coonan, dismissed these views as being ‘not well informed’. I hope, Minister Pyne that you were one of those people who signed the petition. The signatories believe the internet should be regulated in a similar way to other media. If adults wished to ‘opt in’ to access the material then of course that would be their right, but they would have to apply for their right of access.

We started a petition that requested that federal government funding to state and local government be tied to mandatory internet pornography filters being installed in public libraries and that federal government funding of childcare centres be tied to mandatory internet pornography filters being installed. We had nearly 5,000 people sign this particular petition. The government’s response after pressure from Labor and the coalition backbench was the national filter scheme. The scheme offered free filters to families and public libraries. It was announced in June 2006 but has not been implemented and nor, 10 months later, has an implementation date been set. The filter scheme will be backed by, we think, a very large public awareness campaign to educate parents about online dangers. The government has said information will be provided in online and printed advisements as well as through a telephone help line.

We believe genuinely—and I think we have cross-party support for this—that there are several flaws in the existing policy. I will tell you one reason in particular. The Australian Library and Information Association has been openly hostile to mandatory filtering. Therefore, the majority of libraries are unable to take up the offer of a free filter. Only one-third of households have internet filters on their family computers, which suggests that a reliance on end user filtering will be unlikely to protect children from harmful internet content.

Our policy of clean feed at ISP level is far more effective and deals with the problem directly. Even the member for Sturt would acknowledge that this is the Holy Grail of policy with respect to internet filtering. We need to filter it at the source. People in public libraries are basically coming to me and saying, ‘Well, it’s our choice.’ It should not be their choice. It is our choice, as the people who set standards in the community, to dictate what they should show in libraries. I think we should be nationally consistent with this. Therefore, in the time remaining, I urge Senator Coonan in particular to revisit her opposition to a proper policy on internet filtering and give children and families in my electorate the internet protection that they need.

See this speech in context