Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On Tuesday we recognised White Balloon Day and the important work that Bravehearts do in preventing child sexual assault in remote, rural and regional areas. Our attention was similarly and shockingly drawn to this issue when the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse issued their 2007 Little children are sacred report. In that report we learned of the destructive and evil influence of pornography in remote Indigenous communities—particularly for children who are exposed to this material as the report says:

… as a way to encourage and prepare children for sex or grooming.

In response to our collective sense of outrage, despair and resolve, the Howard government acted with the Northern Territory intervention and banned pornographic material from these communities. As I said when the current government introduced further legislation on these matters, none of us are immune from the evil impact of pornography. Therefore, we should especially not be blind to the impact of this material on all Australian children, regardless of where they live or whether they are Indigenous to this land.

The home should be the safest place for a child—a safe haven, a sanctuary for love, care and development and a place where they are not violated or at risk of being violated physically, emotionally and indeed spiritually. We have laws in this country at state and federal level that serve to protect children from the predatory behaviour of those who use pornography as a tool to corrupt and exploit children for their own selfish and base purposes.

We have also taken, in this place and others, steps to protect children from child pornography and have moved to afford new protections that relate to new media and technology. However, one area we have overlooked is to protect against the failure of parents themselves, who either negligently or knowingly expose children to R18+ material or category 1 and category 2 publications. In fact, our laws specifically exempt parents who allow their children to be exposed to this grade of material from any sanction.

Now I am all for parental responsibility and allowing parents to bring up their child according to the values they hold dear as a family. I am not an advocate of the nanny state. However, when those values place a child at risk or contravene our values more broadly as a society, our laws should and must draw the line. It is not acceptable knowingly or negligently to expose a child to pornographic material, whether you are a parent of that child or not. To do so, in my view, is child abuse—it is an assault on their innocence and on their psychological and sexual wellbeing that has long-lasting impacts.

In an outstanding paper delivered by Federal Magistrate and Adjunct Professor to the School of Law at the University of Western Sydney, Dr Tom Altobelli, to the recent World Congress on Family Law and Children’s Rights in the UK he recounted a case heard in the Federal Magistrates Court in February 2007. The court heard shocking testimony of the display of sexualised behaviour of a five-year-old boy towards his two-year-old younger brother, as a result of his exposure to pornographic material he had found on his father’s computer. The testimony read:

Sam—

not his real name—

stated that he saw people with no clothes on the computer. Sam described getting hot in the head when he thinks about doing things stating ‘My head feels hot inside and I don’t like these feelings’.

The case further heard that both parents had been aware of Sam’s access to this material for two years. Sam and all children like him deserve better. They deserve to be protected and they look to us in this place and parliaments across Australia to provide that protection.

A recent Australian study reported children saying they felt sick, yuck, disgusted, repulsed and upset after having seen or experienced pornography on the internet. Longer term exposure puts one at greater risk of developing sexually deviant tendencies, committing sexual offences, experiencing difficulties in one’s intimate relationships and accepting the rape myth. These influences are more pronounced for boys than girls, but sadly it is our daughters who are ultimately objectified and abused as a result of pornography.

If adults and parents wish to expose themselves to this material, that is their business; it is a free country. But even those who would defend an adult’s right to porn would surely not oppose any restriction or sanction placed on parents who knowingly or negligently exposed their children to this abuse.

In this country we have rules that protect our children from the dangers of firearms in the home. Any ammunition must be stored in a locked and separate container which is very solid. Failure to meet these requirements attracts a jail sentence. If we can protect our children from guns, then we should also be aware of the loaded gun that is lying around in the homes of thousands of Australians on computers, on coffee tables, in bathrooms, in bookcases within easy reach and access of their child, who will suffer the consequences of their exposure to pornography for years to come, potentially for the rest of their lives.

Some may consider my warning alarmist, but if we are serious about protecting our children, we cannot comfort ourselves that pornography only destroys the lives of young Indigenous Australians. All of our children are at risk—we must do all we can to protect them, and do it now.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to associate myself with the remarks made by the member for Cook.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 8.00 pm, the debate is interrupted.