Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The idea behind the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012 is to bring the classification categories for computer games into line with existing categories used to classify films and other media. Under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 the different types of classification for computer games are G for general, PG for parental guidance, M for mature, MA15+ for mature accompanied and RC for refused classification. Within the current system, the highest legally available classification category for a computer game is MA15+. Games which are not suitable for a minor to play are currently refused classification. Presently a very small number of videogames are refused classification. Unlike film, videogames do not have an R18+ classification. Games would be in this classification for violence, language, nudity, drug use or adult themes. Although the act has been reviewed several times since 1995, an R18+ classification for computer games has not been added. In order for this classification to be added to the act, all state, territory and federal attorneys-general must unanimously agree to its introduction—this has only recently been agreed upon.

With no R18+, there is evidence that games meant for adults were rated MA15+, making them available to minors and confusing parents who try to do the right thing. We understand that shoehorning has occurred of videogames which might usually be classified R18+ into the MA15+ category. Clearly adult games, we believe, should be restricted to adults. It is more appropriate that they are classified in this new category rather than being shoehorned into the lesser category of MA15+. With this proposed change, parents would have a better idea of what a game is like. Adults would be allowed freedom of choice and children would be prevented from purchasing adult games. Some games which would ordinarily be classified R18+ are being modified and classified within the MA15+ category. With an R18+ classification, these games could be placed in the most appropriate category for them.

Not only does the current classification system fail to allow adults the right to choose; it also falls short on protecting minors from potentially harmful or disturbing content. A huge number of games rated MA18+ in Australia have been rated for 17- or 18-year-olds in similar and like-minded countries such as the US and many of the member states of Europe. On top of that, a mere handful of games have been edited to earn their local rating.

Contrary to some claims, the lack of an R rating for games makes it easy for children to access adult content. Legislating to allow an R18+ category will give consumers clear information, a clearer choice and more confidence in the games they buy for themselves and for their children. On most gaming consoles it is possible to activate parental controls. These controls allow you to set limits on the amount of time and the classifications of games which can be played. Using these controls can assist in enforcing family guidelines on gaming and protect younger gamers from inappropriate material. Some gamers illegally access games which would be classified R18+. It would be better if they were legally available in Australia with the appropriate restrictions, which is something that this bill achieves.

In recent years, the lack of an R18+ rating for video games has seen popular titles, including Fallout 3, and Left 4 Dead 2, refused classification as they are unsuitable to be played by 15-year-olds. It is interesting to note that the average age of Australian computer gamers is 32, with women making up almost half of computer game players. Notably, over 75 per cent of gamers in Australia are over the age of 18. In some cases, publishers of games that are refused classification choose to produce a censored version for the Australian market. Others simply cut their losses and do not introduce the game into Australia. This is bad for the Australian games market, which is growing strongly and is forecast to grow at a rate of about 10 per cent a year, with forecasts predicting that it will reach $2.5 billion annually by 2015. Those are very significant numbers that show what an important industry computer gaming is becoming for our country.

We recognise the contribution of the game development industry to the Australian economy and we also note that more than 88 per cent of Australian households own a device for playing computer games. Australia has 25 major game development studios which export over $120 million worth of product a year. Australia is the only Western country that does not have an R18+ classification for games. The United Kingdom, the USA, New Zealand and all of the member countries of the EU have adult classifications for computer games. There is a risk that, if this issue cannot be resolved, Australian gaming companies will be adrift in what is now a $70 billion worldwide industry and Australian games players, the backbone of the future games production industry, will either be cut out of the leading edge of the creative industries professions or forced to break customs laws in order to access the games they want to play which, as I have just noted, others around the world have ready access to.

I want to highlight a couple of real-life inconsistencies from the current classification regime with three games that are available in Australia at the MA15+ level yet are restricted to adults in other like-minded countries. The game called Fallout 3 was initially refused classification by the Classification Board for realistic depictions of drug use. After some minor edits, it is now available to children aged 15 and over in Australia while like-minded countries restrict the game for sale to adults only. Even with these changes, Fallout 3 is still rated for people 18 years of age and above in Britain, New Zealand and across Europe. In the United States it is rated M17+. In Australia, however, this violent and adult game is legally available for children as young as 15 simply because Australia lacks the capability to restrict games to adults only. Grand Theft Auto IV is the latest in what has been described to me as the infamous adult Grand Theft Auto series. Publishers Rockstar self-censored the game for Australia, making minor cosmetic edits regarding sex acts and blood splatter. It is now available for sale in Australia to children aged 15 and up, while being restricted for sale to adults only in other like-minded jurisdictions. House of the Dead: Overkill was not refused classification in Australia. It contains excessive violence and a high amount of profanity and is available for children aged 15 and over. Meanwhile, overseas rating agencies have classified this game for adults only.

That is just a few examples of which we are aware where games that probably would have been more appropriately classified as R18+ were shoehorned into the lesser category of M15+. Clearly, once this new category comes in, it will allow adults to access material, as is appropriate and as is their right to do so, whilst making sure that it is not available for people under the age of 18, for whom this material might be inappropriate to view. It should be noted that this bill was sent to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs for inquiry and the committee recommended that the bill be passed and:

The Committee is satisfied that the evidence demonstrates overwhelming support for an R18+ Restricted classification for computer games. The Committee further notes that the Bill’s aim is not controversial. Rather, it seeks to align the existing classification system for computer games with the system that applies to films.

The coalition endorses and agrees with the findings of that committee.

The passage of this bill will no doubt be welcomed by adult gamers all across Australia. It is my understanding—and I know this for a fact because I have been lobbied extensively since I joined this portfolio—that they have been waiting for this change for some time. The coalition view the change as a sensible measure as an R18+ category currently applies to other forms of entertainment and all this bill does is bring computer games into line with the way we classify films and other materials, and clearly it makes sense to have one uniform regime for all these different forms of media rather than singling out computer games where this classification has not been previously available.

The coalition therefore do not oppose the passage of this bill in the parliament. We welcome the fact that our classification regime will now be a uniform regime classifying all media as one and, importantly, particularly in this case, making sure that computer games with what might be considered to be questionable content for people who can access the MA15+ category but will now be restricted to the R18+ category, as is appropriate. Then the people who are eligible to purchase material within that category can make a decision as adults about what games they purchase and play.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is important to say at the outset of the discussion of this Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012 that there are many terrific uses of computer games. Many Australians enjoy computer games and although I am not a big gamer myself, my two little boys, Sebastian and Theodore, love getting on the iPad any moment they can. Their favourite game is Angry Birds. It is a chance for them to work on their fine motor skills, a little breather for their parents and an opportunity for them to work together as brothers. However, there are many computer games in Australia to which I would not want children exposed and certainly not without their parents' knowledge.

This bill reflects the fact that Australia today is out of step with the international gaming classification systems. As best as I am aware, we are the only country without an R18+ rating for computer games. This bill brings the classification categories for computer games into line with the existing categories that are used to classify films. It makes the Australian classification regime more consistent with international standards. The new R18+ classification will inform consumers, retailers and, most importantly, parents about what games are not suitable for minors. Bond University has conducted research of over 1,200 Australian households on computer game use and attitudes to those games. Ninety-five per cent of Australian homes with children under the age of 18 had a device for playing games. The average Australian gamer is aged 32 and women make up 47 per cent of computer game players. Gone is the day when the only gamers in Australia were teenage boys. PricewaterhouseCoopers has estimated that the Australian gaming industry is worth just under $2 billion. By 2015 this is forecast to reach $2.5 billion and globally the interactive game market is predicted to reach $90 billion by 2015 with an annual growth rate of eight per cent a year. The gaming industry is enjoying Chinese style growth.

Computer games are a big part of modern life in Australian families. As the member for Blaxland noted in his second reading speech, a lot of Australians are pretty passionate about this reform. There has also been research that has examined gaming and its place in Australian families. As I have noted, nearly all families with children under 18 play computer games. Almost half of parents said they play games as a way of spending time with their children. Over 70 per cent of parents used computer games for educational purposes. Most parents talked about computer games with their children. They had a great awareness of and use of parental controls on gaming devices. Sixty per cent of parents said they are always present when games are bought by their children.

There is an important need for the R18+ classification. In 2009 the Attorney-General's Department released a discussion paper on the introduction of the R18+ classification for computer games. That inquiry received more than 58,000 submissions, with 98 per cent of those supporting introduction of an R18+ classification. The R18+ classification provides a system to protect children from material that might be harmful. All parents understand how quickly children pick things up from their environment. A friend of mine told me about her 11-year-old boy who was watching a TV show and he said one of the characters was snorting coke. His mum asked, 'How do you know that?' He replied, 'I know it from Grand Theft Auto.' As a parent I want to be sure that I know what is and what is not suitable for my children, and I know many other Australian parents do too. The introduction of an R18+ classification helps prevent children and teens from accessing unsuitable material while still ensuring that adults are free to make their own decisions about the computer games they play.

Research from the National Institute of Mental Health in the United States has confirmed that a teenager's brain is still different from an adult's brain, still a work in progress. There are great changes going on in the parts of the brain in the frontal lobe responsible for self-control, judgment and emotions. Some of those changes continue appearing in the brain into a person's 20s as the brain develops, laying down foundations for the rest of the young person's life. That is good and bad news. It means we can train the teenage brain but it also means, as Jay Giedd of the National Institute of Mental Health has said, 'You are hardwiring your brain in adolescence. Do you want to hardwire it for sports and doing maths or for lying on the couch in front of TV or a console?'

Perhaps the most positive vision of computer gaming is that set down by Jane McGonigal, a game designer, researcher and author. She argues in a terrific book I read over summer and which I commend to other Australians called Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better—that games can make us better, that games have the capacity to change the world. I did not agree with everything I read in the book. I have been a bit sceptical of computer games and their impact on social connectedness in Australia. But McGonigal makes the most articulate case for the positive role that gaming can play in our society. She proposes a bunch of ways in which games can help us be happier in everyday life, stay better connected with those we care about, feel more rewarded for making our best effort and discover new ways of making a difference in the real world. She gives the example of Lexulous, the online word game on Facebook played between family and friends. It is like Scrabble but with online chat. It is a great excuse for many players to talk to their mum every day. While playing the game there is often chatting taking place. Players might say: 'Your dad says hello,' 'The knee still hurts and I'm putting ice on it,' or 'Have you started your internship yet?'

McGonigal gives the example of the extraordinary: web and mobile phone applications designed to help people contribute to their community. The motto is: 'Got two minutes? Be extraordinary.' Players can browse a list of micro volunteer missions, each mission helping a real-life, non-profit organisation accomplish one of its goals. One mission is designed for Crystal House, an organisation helping children living in poverty get the education, nutrition, health care and mentorship they so desperately need. It asks players to write a short text message of encouragement or support to students in Mexico, Venezuela, South Africa or India, before they take important tests and exams.

So we should not turn away from the benefits that games and gaming can bring. But, as this bill recognises, at the same time we should not dismiss the risks that unsuitable material can have on children and adolescents. An R18+ classification helps better inform parents of what is not suitable.

Gaming is now a ubiquitous part of modern Australian life. Nine out of 10 Australian households now have a device for playing computer games. I know that many Australian parents share my concerns about making sure their children do not access harmful material.

It is important that the Australian classification system has parity with comparable overseas systems. Games like Call of Duty warn of blood and gore, drug references, intense violence and strong language. In the United States Call of Duty has an M17+ rating but presently only attracts an MA15+ rating in Australia. We need a quick and easy system for classifying the material in computer games. Many parents have told us just that. While the member for Mayo has written about the dead hand of government, the government can also offer a helping hand. It can amend the classification act of 1995 and align the R18+ computer rating with the R18+ film classification rating. It helps inform parents of what games are not suitable for their children as they grow and develop. It ensures that they enjoy the fun and interactive and educational benefits that computer games can and will bring to Australian families.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to rise to speak to the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. This has been a long time coming. This particular piece of legislation is in many respects the summit of what has been a concerted effort by gamers and others involved in the digital economy for many years now. If I cast my mind back to about three or so years ago—when I was shadow minister for tourism and the arts—at the time a very concerted effort was being made by a number of people across Australia to see the realisation of this particular bill, which involves the introduction of an R18+ classification.

Coming from the Gold Coast and my electorate of Moncrieff—where there has historically been a very strong computer game development industry in my city—this also provides new opportunities for game developers to explore the full repertoire of games they are able to develop and market. So, in many respects I think this is a positive step forward.

It is not without stating that there is some controversy about this. The separate issue is whether or not that controversy is warranted. That notwithstanding, there is no doubt that there is some controversy around the creation of an R18+ computer game classification. There are many in the community who would ask, 'Why is there a need for an R18+ classification for computer games?' Computer games are played by children and surely there would not seem to be a need for an R18+ classification. Furthermore, I know that many parents have concerns that children are exposed to overly violent computer games and, increasingly, it would appear that there is a blend of both violence and sexual activity in computer games. It is understandable that a number of parents have concerns about this issue. As a parent of a three-year-old boy I can draw linkages as to why those concerns are there. But, as always, what is important is to recognise that you need to be appraised of the facts. The facts in this matter make it very clear that the introduction of an R18+ classification is a step in the right direction. As speakers in this debate before me have highlighted, there already exists around the world R18 classifications in other Western democracies that have access to computer games, and that these days is virtually everybody. In addition to that, of course, there is also the issue that there already exists an R18+ classification when it comes to certain magazines and with respect to the film and television industry. It already exists in other mediums, so one could logically ask, 'Why wouldn't it exist with respect to computer games as well?'

I know the argument that is sometimes put is that it has to deal with the degree of immersion—the view that when you play a computer game there is a high degree of emotional immersion in the computer game which could arguably make it more realistic. I have no doubt that there are many psychologists and psychiatrists that have dealt with this issue over a great period of time. What we know, though, is that—with the convergence that is taking place in the digital economy, with the fact that, for example, computer games are no longer simply limited to something that you buy a separate Xbox or PlayStation or Wii or whatever for, it might be that you purchase and use that platform solely for playing games—computer games are now able to be played across a whole range of different platforms. Certainly, yes, there are still dedicated game platforms like the Xbox, Sony PlayStation and Nintendo Wii, but broader than that there is the opportunity today to play computer games on computers, on those dedicated game platforms, online and, in addition to that, on mobile devices.

I was sitting here during the debate looking at my iPhone and noted that you can actually purchase Grand Theft Auto III and play it on your iPhone. There is nothing particularly unique about an iPhone. It is perhaps the most ubiquitous smartphone around. It just underscores the convergence that has happened and the fact that what was historically an exceptionally controversial game is now able to be simply downloaded for $5.99 off the Apple iTunes App Store and in a matter of five or 10 minutes you can play that game on your telephone.

The reality is that we see across the world now the convergence, as I said, with games being available to be played online, on computer, on dedicated gaming platforms, on telephones. In each and every one of these respects there is one thing, though, that has not changed since the beginning of the information technology industry, and that is that, virtually guaranteed, a 14-year-old is going to be better at it than anybody over the age of 30. So, mindful of what should become some kind of new law when it comes to IT, the fact is that 14-year-olds today can play 18+ games even without an R18 classification under the actual legislation that is before the House today. The reason is that it is so ubiquitous now. There are opportunities to download what they refer to as 'patches' off the internet, to purchase a computer game that might be rated MA15+ and download off the internet a patch that enables you effectively to open up those elements of the computer game that have been censored to fall within that classification.

That is effectively how it works currently. It is not a case that game developers develop a computer game for the rest of the world and then develop a different computer game for the Australian market so that they can fall within the MA15+ category rather than being under the R18+ category. What actually happens is that game developers develop a computer game for global release, which of course then has certain scenes edited or censored within the program itself so that when it plays that particular scene or sequence of events it does not occur within the Australian context, given that it is an MA15+ classification rather than an R18+ classification. But because that code sits in the computer game it is relatively easy for any slightly savvy person to be able to download the patch off the web, which enables that person then to be able to play the full computer game on their device. That is already occurring. The reality is that anybody who tries to pretend that that is not already taking place is completely ignorant of the reality. So I say to parents that this is in fact a tool that can be used for observing and controlling what your children are exposed to. The creation of an R18+ classification does not in any way, shape or form mean that children are going to be exposed to more violent or more sexual computer games. What it means is that parents will be better informed about what their children are playing. It means that parents will be in a better and stronger position to make a decision about what they want their children to be exposed to. There is absolutely no doubt that many parents—and indeed, I would suggest, based on anecdotal evidence, most parents—are mistakenly of the view that, because their child is playing an MA15+ game, it is in some way less violent or less sexual than an R18+ game. The fact, for the reasons I outlined earlier, is that in all likelihood the child is actually playing the R18+ version of the game but the parents got a false sense of security because it said on the packaging that it was an MA15+ game.

For those reasons, the creation of an R18+ classification means that parents would see, in the store, that that version of the computer game is R18+ and therefore should be confined to adults and adults only. That means it is less likely that Nanna will buy that particular product off the shelf and give it to her little grandson on his 15th birthday. I think it is a step in the right direction because it empowers parents to make good decisions.

We also need to look at this in a broader context. As the shadow minister mentioned, it is no longer the domain of simply 14-year-olds to be playing computer games. The reality is that today a whole host of Australians play computer games, and the average age of computer gamers is 32. I can plead guilty: I play computer games—though not a lot and certainly not as much as I used to. One of my first purchases was in fact Grand Theft Auto, so I have some degree of familiarity with the computer game. In fact, I think I may have been one of the first people to talk about it in this chamber, many years ago. There is a huge market for computer games. It is a bigger industry than the film industry. It is easy when you think about the mathematics behind it to recognise that, while a punter goes to their local cinema and pays $15 to watch a movie, when someone purchases a computer game they normally pay in the vicinity of $80 to $120. It is a bigger industry that grosses more revenue than the film industry. That underscores the size and significance of this industry. Australia has a toehold in this market. Indeed, we could do much better than we do. That notwithstanding, there are many Australians whose livelihoods depend on the creative juices flowing in the development of computer games which they then can sell to a global market. In many respects it presents an opportunity for Australia to really punch above its weight when it comes to the development of these kinds of creative industries.

So, mindful that we live in a free society, mindful that we take the view that adults have the ability to determine what is appropriate for them to play or watch, and mindful that the average age of a computer gamer is 32 and not 14, I think it is in every way, shape and form a common-sense decision to introduce this classification. For that reason, the coalition is supportive of the bill as well.

The point I will end upon concerns the operation of the R18+ classification, which requires a unanimous agreement between attorneys-general at the state government level. I hope that outcome would occur naturally following the passage of this legislation. I know it is important that people have the chance through an inquiry process to get their concerns on the record, and I and many others have taken into account their concerns. That notwithstanding, though, for all the reasons I outlined I hope that attorneys-general across the states support the creation of this new classification, because it is in Australia's long-term interests as a game-developing country and because we are mindful of the fact that so many Australians play computer games.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for his education. I will try and remember some of that or, if not, look at the Hansard. It was only a couple of months ago that I visited a high school in my electorate and we were talking about technology. I was explaining to these students, who I think were in year 11, about how we were taught to use slide rules, and that was greeted with mirth and much consternation. I know the member for Banks would know all about this because he and I went to school together from kindergarten. He was probably far better on the slide rule than I was; he went on to become a lawyer so he must have been. It is interesting from the aspect of my generation that we did talk about slide rules and the application of log tables, but that is just when we are talking about maths. There are so many other things in technology which have far outstripped anything that we could have contemplated when we were at school and at the age which is being targeted by this change in the classification structure for video gaming.

I am very fortunate. I have five grandchildren, and one of my grandchildren, 10-year-old Nathaniel, is absolutely very gifted when it comes to gaming. He is very gifted when it comes to maths as well, but when it comes to gaming he excels. One of the things a dutiful grandfather does is take the grandchildren along and try to encourage them to buy books, and nine times out of 10 it is not the books they want it is the game. I have to say that, for the life of me, I cannot make a value judgement on these things. I take what is there and, when it says 15+, I know for a fact that my grandson Nathaniel at age 10 can fly through games like that. I have heard what other members have said in this debate on what is currently available in the 15+ category but, unless I have the ability to go through and look at those things myself, many of these things would effectively go through to the keeper. I will be out there doing my grandfatherly duty and thinking I am doing the right thing for my grandson, only to find out that it might be a game like the honourable member was referring to that he plays at the age of 35 or whatever on his iPhone.

This is very much a tool for parents, or in my case grandparents. It is not out there to debilitate the user market. The member for Moncrieff was saying that the average gamer is aged 35. I know when the member for Banks and I went to school, the only choice you had about games was rugby league in the winter and cricket in the summer.

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was marvellous.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We were a bit younger then. I understand that things have changed very rapidly and I understand people's use of video based games, particularly online gaming. We see the problem manifest now in respect of online gambling. For instance, we were recently publicly discussing the issue of poker machines. While that is taking place, simultaneously there is this large and ever-emerging issue of online gambling. As regulators these are things that we need to stay in touch with in such a way that we protect the community and help the community to make value decisions.

My decision to support the bill is not so much to ensure that there is an R18+ rating established for video games to restrict 18-year-olds but to focus on using it as a tool, particularly for parents. When it comes to gaming there is certainly a generational aspect. I have tried to finesse it a little, and the grey hair of the member for Banks and I probably gives the game away a little, but there is very much a generational aspect to the take-up of gaming technology. I see that this would be something that I would value as a grandparent when I am going out to do the right thing to buy my grandson a game. I would very much prefer to buy him a book but I know that that probably is just not going to happen. That is something that I think we do need to focus on. I, like everybody else, have received many representations from people saying that you are asserting the legislators' role and restricting the liberty of people. That is true, but most times when we make a law it does actually restrict a person's liberty. But, in this case, you must say that the community value of that must be assessed. This bill is not trying to deprive the ability of people to access games, but it is certainly making a value judgment on what should be restricted for younger and developing minds.

Videogames are far different from simply going to the movies and seeing something that is R rated. This is a form of technology that invites participation. It invites the person playing the game to be highly interactive with it. It invites the person to perhaps kill off opponents to get to the next level of a game, with increasing levels of violence to meet higher targets or reward rates that are recognised within the gaming community. If that is right, and if some of these games have the level of violence that the previous speakers have indicated—I have to say I have not seen these games—and if it is right that many also transgress into gaming of a sexual nature then these are not things that we want to see in the hands of young and developing minds. It is one thing to witness something as a bystander or watch it sitting in a theatre; it is another thing entirely to be engaged and encouraged to participate and have your mindset set around the participation in an objective or a cause, whether that cause is right or wrong, when the cause is dictated by the game itself.

These are things that are a concern to me and certainly of concern to our party, and no doubt the House as a whole. I have grandchildren, who are very much involved in gaming, one who I have indicated is very gifted in that respect, notwithstanding the fact that he is only 10 years old. I think I would need some guidance if I were going out to look at games for him. I am sure he would probably tell me something different. He would probably want the best of what he could possibly do or the most challenging game he could possibly get. The thing is we do want to have some say in restricting the games that can get into the minds of younger people—games that we would ordinarily think were inappropriate.

I have seen some research material that indicates that, unlike movies, interacting with games has an impact on a person's outlook to violence and desensitises people to violence. I am not sure of the validity of that research. But, in my own mind, I can make a significant distinction between sitting back and passively watching something with an entertainment value and actually rolling up your sleeves, getting involved and becoming part of the game itself—being a perpetrator of violence or anything else. Participating in the game to that extent takes you from the realm of simply watching characters on a screen to one of participation. As many of us know throughout our electorates, there have been many instances of people who, regrettably, have been arrested in the last couple of years for matters in respect of pornography, particularly child based pornography. The police are doing a fantastic job going about researching and investigating child pornography. One of thing things that strikes me absolutely is to what extent those who participate go from a very surreal environment to when they hit the send button and reality comes to mind. When they are sitting back being voyeuristic or whatever, in the comfort of their own place, it is not until they hit the send button when they go out and solicit somebody. If you take the same analogy and put it to gaming, it is where you are sitting back, participating, and you think at that stage, whether it be sexual degradation or violence, 'This is all acceptable and part of the game and I am part of the game.' I would think that should be quarantined to a mature mind, one who can actually make the decision that this is not real, this is a game, and it therefore would not impact the developing minds of the young. They are the reasons I support this bill. I do not ordinarily believe in censorship but in cases of extreme violence, particularly violence of a sexual nature, I honestly believe we should be doing everything humanly possible as a caring community to protect children.

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. On the weekend I was very surprised when my son said, 'Do you know anything about censorship for computer games?' I said, 'What do you mean?' He said: 'We really want classification. I'm an adult now and I think it is important we have an R rating for some of our computer games.' You could have floored me. My son had been very angry with me when I would not let him play Grand Theft Autobecause I thought it was too violent, but now he is an adult he endorses our position on having an R rating. The member for Moncrieff was saying that he also plays Grand Theft Auto. I cannot make the same confession. The worse thing I do is play Sudoku on my iPad. There are other people who are very passionate about it. I have been contacted by a number of constituents who also endorse the proposed R rating.

Currently the system provides that the highest legally available classification category for computer games is MA15+. The issue my son has is that games that are not acceptable for a person under 15 years are refused classification, meaning that they may not be sold, hired, exhibited, displayed, demonstrated or advertised in Australia. As the member for Moncrieff said, the average age for computer gamers in Australia is 32. Surprisingly, women comprise 47 per cent of computer game players and 75 per cent of gamers in Australia are aged over 18 years. Developments in both games and gaming platforms in recent times ensure that long gone are the days when computers games were just for children. We heard the member for Fowler talking about his grandson and using the slate with his colleagues when they were at school. I did not use slates but I remember the computer when I was at school, but technology has moved on.

Most gaming devices on the market today play DVD films and more broadly can access the internet. With the continuing development of interactive entertainment and its ever-increasing popularity, it makes sense to have gaming classification in line with film and television classifications. Additionally, the rapid development of game graphics and high-definition digital imagery give rise to images far more realistic and explicit than at any time previous. Games are interactive and in many respects the allure of gaming is a personal matter: some play to engage with other gamers in a battle of wits; others seek to step out of the real world into a world where they have the controls and are able to make the choices; some just like the entertainment and relaxation offered by simply playing a game. Regardless of the motivation, the gaming world is one that is not limited to a window of an hour or two. People can enter and re-enter as often as they want and for whatever period of time they wish. That is vastly different from the limitations associated with watching TV or a film, where you have a limited time and are more restricted.

Without the R18 classification, games meant for adults are currently rated MA15+ thus making them available to minors and confusing parents and carers who try to manage access to such games. Clearly the R18 classification given to films, as an example, relates to the level of violence, language, nudity, drug use and adult themes. This rating provides a clear guideline for adults to make informed decisions. No less for the gaming world—I believe adult games should be restricted to adults. Additionally, introducing an 18+ classification allows parents a better opportunity to assess game content and suitability, allows adults freedom of choice and prevents people under the age of 18 from purchasing adult games.

At present some degree of self-regulation has occurred for the Australian gaming marketplace, where games which would ordinarily be classified R17+ and R18+ in other parts of the world are being modified and classified within the MA15+ category. Unfortunately, in some circumstances adult themes behind the game remain and potentially harmful or disturbing content remains accessible to people under 18. With R18+ classification these games could be placed in a more appropriate category. Australia is the only Western country that does not have an adult R18+ classification for games. The UK, EU member countries, the USA and New Zealand all have adult classifications for computer games.

Grand Theft Auto IV, a development of the original Grand Theft Auto game—a series of games with a huge player following—is an example of self-censorship by a game developer. This particular game came to the Australian market with the removal of stimulated sex scenes and pools of blood and a reduction in the visible representation of injuries. That is part of the reason why I was not happy for my son, who was under 18, to have access to that game. Resulting from these omissions in the game, it was given an MA15+ classification. The game still includes the ability to murder, blackmail, fight, steal, extort and bribe. The high-impact game also exposes players to mature themes such as prostitution, gambling, drug use and gang violence.

In the United Kingdom the original version of this game was given an 18+ adult rating, in New Zealand it was given 18+ and in the European Union member countries it was given 18+. Yet in Australia the game is and was available to 15-year-olds. Even with the alterations or omissions to the game for the Australian market, this example qualifies why the current classification system needs to be modified. This would give parents, relatives, friends and carers, when purchasing a gift for a person under 18, the ability to review the suitability of games for a child under 18. They must have a mechanism whereby they can evaluate the game content and whether a game has high-impact adult content, content to which a young player should not be exposed. Unfortunately, it is currently too often the case that people purchase games based on the ratings applied to them, and in the case of the MA15+ games they take the classification on face value without considering the themes or content. It would be my assertion that if Grand Theft Auto IV were a movie and contained the themes present within the Australian version of this game it would most likely be an R18+ film. The issue of R18+ classification is not an issue for controversy for those concerned with the amount of violence children are exposed to. The bill I see is not about opening the doors to more violent and mature games entering into the Australian market. It is about bringing our game classification system into line with much of the world, and providing further capability to assist those people with a responsibility to children to protect those children from obscenities and profanity.

'Appropriateness' is probably the best descriptive term; this bill seeks to achieve appropriateness for classification. Parents must be able to easily identify if a game is appropriate for their child or not. Currently, parental controls exist on modern computer gaming devices so parents and carers can censor games to an extent. Within Australia there are 25 major gaming development studios supporting an industry worth a predicted $2.5 billion annually. This industry has a far reach, and needs the support of a clear and appropriate classification system—one that reflects comparative standards internationally.

This legislation will have an impact on our society but also on the individual gamer. The support for this bill from the gaming community has been overwhelming. As I said, I have been contacted by a number of constituents. The consultation report released in November 2010 reported that 98 per cent of the 58,437 submissions in respect of introducing an R18+ rating were supportive. A Galaxy Research telephone poll reflected that 80 per cent of people contacted supported the introduction of an R18+ classification.

Steve Buic, a member of the Darwin Gamers Association, has been in contact with my office regarding this classification. Those in the gaming community of Darwin want this change. They see the value of an R18+ classification. This bill will give consumers both the freedom and protection they deserve. In conclusion, I echo the words of Steve Buic:

The computer gaming community in the Top End want an R18+ gaming classification. For too long now, the Australian gaming industry has been held back by classification laws. It is pretty clear to us that some games which get classified as MA15+ are too violent for 15 year olds. There needs to be another classification level. Games which are modified to meet Australian standards do not always have the same game content quality. Adult computer games are being censored by the classifications board but the fact is these games are not designed or marketed to fifteen year olds for an MA15+ classification—they're computer games for adults and such should be labelled accordingly. There are games in Australia which 15 year olds can purchase that you have to be 18 to buy in New Zealand or the UK. Computer gaming is a form of entertainment which is very similar to television and film. The fact that the two classification systems are so different highlights the need for a change. I believe an R18+ classification will help parents buy more appropriate games for their children. We need an R18+ classification.

So, being a good member and representing my electorate, I am actually going to support this bill.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. I am sorry that I cannot join in the debate about slide rules and slates, but, like the member for Solomon, I do remember having the Commodore 64. I do remember that, to play a computer game, you had to sit and wait for a tape player to load a game for about half an hour, and hope that it did not get caught some way through it, so that you could play a game of Aztec Challenge or Soccer. The most violent it got then was that a gorilla might throw a barrel at your head while your character was playing, but that was about it. But things have moved on enormously since then. There have been advancements in technology, advancements in innovation and advancements in people's creativity, and that is a good thing. It is extraordinarily to be welcomed. But it is time for the law to catch up.

The Australian Greens will support this bill because it will put in place important protections for minors while ensuring that adults have the right to access the range of computer games that are available on the international market. If there is one area where it is fruitless to try to stand behind and keep the tide back from what is happening globally, it is anything that happens on the internet. But this bill will create greater consistency in our classification system by creating an R18+ category while improving the civil rights of gaming adults and will relieve the burden of the computer-gaming industry.

This important reform has been 10 years in the making. It has involved extensive consultation, as previous speakers have noted. For a long time, reform to the National Classification Scheme along these lines had been blocked by South Australia and New South Wales, which opposed the integration of computer games into the scheme. Now that these objections have been overcome, it is important that this legislation is passed so that states are able to pass complementary legislation enabling the changes to come into force by the beginning of next year.

This bill has widespread community and industry support. In December 2009, the Attorney-General's Department held a consultation on R18+ for computer games and there were 58,437 respondents, with 98 per cent in support. In May last year, a further 2,000 people were surveyed on R18+ to help inform the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. In July last year, agreement was reached on reform. There have been two inquiries examining this bill. On 29 February, the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs reported on the bill, and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee is also examining the bill. The Australian Law Reform Commission has also supported the changes proposed in this bill.

As I said at the outset, the Australian Greens support this bill because it will bring greater consistency to the classification system while putting in place important protections. It will mean that parental supervision of computer game use will become more straightforward, with clear demarcation of which material may be appropriate for particular age groups. The bill will also remove a particular consequence caused by the lack of an R18+ classification which meant that some material, which will now be classified R18+, was previously or is currently being allowed at 15 plus. This is a serious problem and it will now be overcome.

Of course, not everyone who plays computer games is young. In fact, gaming is a popular adult pastime, a fact that this legislation reflects. Surveying by the department showed that the average age of gamers is 32 and, despite popular misconceptions, 47 per cent of gamers are women. So this change will be very welcome to the millions of adults who enjoy gaming, and it represents an important improvement in their right to choose.

Industry will also welcome the legislation. Up until now it has been burdened by the significant compliance costs of modifying games to fit with a restrictive classification system. Some estimates suggest that the worldwide value of the video-gaming industry is over $100 billion and growing, so these restrictions were also a barrier to Australia's full participation in a growing section of the world economy. I know that video game developers in my electorate of Melbourne will welcome this change.

In conclusion, I know that many members have concerns about the negative impact of excessive video game consumption and much of the content, and I understand those concerns. But these reforms will better enable parents to assist their children to adopt positive gaming habits and make informed choices, and they will contribute to a rational, integrated classification system that properly supports the media and entertainment industry.

However, the passage of this bill is not yet the final step, because the implementation of these changes will rely on the revised classification guidelines, which are yet to be released. I want to make clear the commitment on the part of the Australian Greens to work with the industry and with stakeholders such as the Western Australian Commissioner for Children and Young People and the Australian Council on Children and the Media on the guidelines process to ensure that the guidelines get the balance right between the right of gamers to access content and ensuring that the best interests of children are protected. I commend the bill to the House.

Russell Matheson (Macarthur, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. This bill introduces an R18+ classification into the Australian computer game classification categories. It also allows existing games to be submitted for reclassification once the R18+ classification is included.

The current Australian classification regime under the classification act involves film, magazines and electronic game producers applying to the Classification Board for classification of their products. Applications must include supporting material that will assist the board in deciding the appropriate classification. For example, an applicant seeking a classification for a computer game must include with their written application a copy of the game and a document outlining the details of the game, including a description of the game play experience. Once the application and supporting material have been submitted to the board, the relevant entertainment media is then classified according to the principles and categories detailed in the 2005 National Classification Code and the guidelines for the classification of films and computer games.

The 2005 code sets out the classification tables for publications, films and computer games. Examining these tables reveals that computer games currently do not enjoy the capacity to be awarded an R18+ classification under Australia's entertainment media classification regime. Consequently, computer games that would otherwise fall in an R18+ classification currently face two prospects. Firstly, these games can be refused classification. In that case, they cannot be sold, hired, exhibited, displayed or advertised in Australia. Alternatively, these games can be modified by the producer to comply with the lower criteria of the MA15+ classification. These outcomes have significant implications for consumer choice in the computer games market and the ability to protect Australian children from unsuitable material in that market.

It is a universally recognised economic principle that consumer welfare is enhanced in a market if the consumers have a large degree of choice between products. Indeed, such a principle is supported by Australia's classification regime, with the National Classification Code mandating that classification decisions are to give effect to the principle that adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want. The average age of a contemporary Australian computer gamer is 32, a person well into their adult years. In fact, 70 per cent of computer game players in Australia are 18 years or older. This market characteristic has been recognised by computer game producers, who are now producing an increasing number of computer games for distribution in Australia that are more suitable to the maturity levels of adult game players. It is therefore curious that Australia remains the only developed nation that does not have an adult rating for computer games.

Computer game producers should not be denied the opportunity to develop games that appeal to the largest consumer group. Nor they should be forced to modify their games so that they comply with the more restrictive MA15+ classification if they wish to distribute their games to adults in the Australian market. This country has always encouraged through appropriate and sensible supply side regulation the development of products by businesses that most effectively meet the demands of their markets. The market for adult computer games should be no exception to this.

On the demand side of the market, adult consumers should not have their choice of computer games restricted by a classification system that does not allow them to access games that would otherwise fall within an R18+ classification. This is as much said in the National Classification Code guiding principle of adult freedom of choice. This bill will address these concerns by allowing those games to be made available to Australia's adult game players under the R18+ classification scheme.

Additionally, the bill will allow games that have been refused classification previously to be resubmitted to the Classification Board for reclassification as R18+ so that they can be made available in Australia's computer game market. By improving consumer choice in this way, the bill will ensure the sustained growth of the Australian gaming industry, an industry that is forecast to grow at a rate of 10 per cent per year.

The second issue that I would like to raise about the absence of an R18+ classification for computer games in Australia is protecting Australia's children from unsuitable material. As I said earlier, games that would otherwise be classified R18+ can be modified by their producers so that they can meet the criteria of an MA15+ classification, therefore making them available to children. This is not a suitable outcome from our country's classification regime. This has been illustrated by a number of games that were initially deemed unsuitable for child game play being made available to Australian children through attaining an MA15+ classification. For example, the game Fallout 3 was initially refused classification by the Australian Classification Board for its realistic depictions of drug use. However, after some minor producer edits, Fallout 3 was able to be classified as MA15+ despite the fact that it was rated as only being suitable for those 18 years and older in Britain, New Zealand and Europe. Again, Grand Theft Auto IV provides a similar example as it too, after some minor cosmetic edits, was able to be distributed to children under the MA15+ classification. Moreover, some games that are classified as being suitable for adults only in other countries are classified as MA15+ in Australia. Again House of the Dead: Overkill is an example of this. It was classified MA15+ in Australia despite the fact that it was classified as R18+ abroad. This bill will overcome this issue by introducing an R18+ classification for such games, thereby preventing their distribution to children.

The bill will also allow games that are already in the Australian market to be submitted for reclassification by the minister or a person who has been aggrieved by the prior classification decision. In this way the regime will give effect to the National Classification Code guiding principle that minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them.

When it comes to entertainment media there is a need to ensure that everyone is protected from exposure to unsolicited material that they find offensive. In order for this to occur, people must be made aware of the content of such media before they experience it. This is particularly the case for computer games where consumers are not truly aware of the nature and content of games before they begin playing them. Whilst not being able to totally inform the consumer of the content of a games game play experience R18+ will go a long way in enabling consumers to perceive the nature of the game play experience and content when making their purchasing decisions. More importantly, the R18+ classification will allow parents to make informed decisions about the suitability of particular games for their children.

The introduction of an R18+ classification for computer games in our classification regime is well supported. Indeed, when the issue of introducing such a classification was put to public consultation 98 per cent of those involved in that consultation supported introducing an R18+ classification for computer games. Moreover, Galaxy Research's national telephone poll on the issue found that 80 per cent of those people polled supported an R18+ classification. I know that people in my electorate of Macarthur also support the R18+ classification and want uniformity in classification for films, television series and computer games. This will allow them to make an informed decision when purchasing computer games for themselves and their children. That is why I support this bill today, because it is good policy.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to rise today to speak on the Gillard Labor government's Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. We on this side of the House understand the importance the video game industry has both to Australian gamers and to the Australian economy. We understand that what Australia needs is a framework to allow R18+ rating for video games. This bill will bring computer games into line with the classification system for other media and entertainment industries, making Australia more consistent with international standards. Labor is delivering an R18+ classification which will provide protection against adult material for children, freedom of choice for adult gamers and support for our nation's growing industry of video game developers and retailers.

This is a bill that also strongly supports Australian families and small businesses. The current system of classification for video games falls short and fails to adequately safeguard our children against the adult themes of certain games. This is why we are delivering this important reform. As it stands, the 'MA15+ or nothing' system of restriction means that explicit games are either banned altogether or made available to those under 18. This bill will put an end to that. The bill will mean that games are able to be appropriately marketed to the adult consumers. The bill will ensure that violent games which ought to be labelled R18+ can be sold as such without parents having the fear that adult material has slipped through the cracks into an MA15+ classification based on things like how much blood is seen. Too often we see games which in every other country are exclusively sold to adults classed as acceptable for children at the age of 15. Only last year we saw an Australian made game, LA Noire, receive an MA15+ classification, the very lowest classification it received across the world. Across the UK and wider Europe, L.A. Noire received a rating of 18+. The classification board of north America has also limited L.A. Noire to those over the age of 17. Yet in Australia it was to be either banned or put onto the market with a rating of 15+, despite the use of strong violence, crude language, misogyny, sex and drugs. Perhaps even more notably, the company who created it and designed every facet of the game, restricted access to the game's website to over 18s and defined it as an adults only game.

The bill seeks to protect our children from the simulated violence, drug use and sexual themes that come about with adult video games. The government is paying attention and we take notice of the dangers that face our community and we act with determination to fight those dangers. The same could not be said always about the opposition. As recently as August 2010, at a community forum the Leader of the Opposition said that he was not even aware there was a debate on the issue, despite it being across media for the last 2½ years. Meanwhile, our government are taking the action. We are delivering this bill to protect Australian children and parents. We take the risk out of buying video games.

This bill will create the new rating, one which can be seen on the box when you buy the game. This rating will allow parents the ability to make informed decisions about what is and is not acceptable for their children to play. Parents know what is acceptable for their children to play and the Gillard Labor government are recognising that sovereignty. We understand that Australian parents know what is good for their kids. We want parents to see instantly, when they pick up a video game at a store, the realistic and meaningful rating a game has rather than return home to find out later that the game they bought was riddled with gruesome violence or drug use. We are delivering a simple, easy to understand new rating which allows parents to make educated choices, delivering a rating that parents already know and understand. They will recognise it the same way they recognise an R rated movie or television show. With this bill Labor are providing parents with the opportunity to better protect their children through increased awareness and a more accurate rating system. We are providing parents with the recognition that they make good choices for their families.

The bill will also provide for adult gamers, which make up 75 per cent of the Australian gaming community. It will give them their own choice. The Gillard government understand that gamers want to be able to make the choice for themselves and this bill will provide the freedom of choice for those over the age of 18. Three out of four gamers are adults. Yet, as it stands, we do not have an adult rating for video games. So we are taking the steps to remove the uncoordinated and ineffective censorship of Australian adults. This is the same freedom that we enjoy every day. We decide which DVDs we buy, which books we read and which movies we see. Now Labor are ensuring that Australians can enjoy the same freedom when it comes to gaming. The average Australian gamer is not 15 or 16 or even 18; they are 32 years of age and that number is increasing. More than ever adults are playing video games. They are people who have spent more than a decade making their own decisions. They can already go to a DVD store and rent a R18+ film. Now, this bill will allow them to exercise that same choice at their local gaming store.

Often, games fail to make the Australian market based on specific qualities of their content. Fallout 3, for example, was banned not for its violence but its drug use. Drug use is not something that Australian adults are unaware of. Any adult can go down to their local DVD store and rent movies like Pulp Fiction. We can go to a library and rent Trainspotting. Similarly, games like Mortal Kombat have been banned due to extreme violence—the same violence that we see in many films and novels. As adults, we have been afforded the choice to watch films like Scarface, Silence of the Lambsor The Human Centipede, or we can read American Psycho or AClockwork Orange. Now Labor are bringing the video game industry into line with film and literature. We recognise that if adults can make the choice elsewhere, they can make the choice when buying video games.

Our communities deserve the right to choose, to know that their own judgments are being respected across any medium. I am proud to speak on a bill today that will give Australians that respect. The introduction of an R18+ rating classification for video games will do a lot to better support gamers and parents of young gamers. The bill will also provide a boost to the gaming industry for developers and retailers. For game developers, this bill means no longer needing to censure their content to reach Australian markets. Small developers cannot always afford to go through the editing process, removing small elements such as blood pooling and high-definition graphics just to get their foot in the door. For the benefit of those opposite I will make it very clear. It takes time and it costs money. Editing a game to suit a particular country is simply not done. It is a slow and tedious task and in some cases requires the diminution of the integrity of the developer's work. Altering a game into which you have already put so much hard work for what on a global scale is a very small market is not exactly creating a great incentive. For small Australian developers the burden of the current classification system means that they may never see their hard work come to fruition locally. Companies like Rockstar, which is an Australian company, have produced some of the best quality video games around. But they have the same issue if they have to cut and paste different things and destroy the integrity of their games to get them into our market.

Through protecting our children against violent adult themes do we also protect the developers against the legal ramifications if children act out what they see in the games? By taking the adult content out of the reach of children we are preventing the imitation of violent games, which could often lead to legal action against developers. Game developers should not be victims of a broken classification system. When they create adult games marketed to adults there should not be a fear of litigation when their product ends up in the wrong hands.

The Gillard Labor government is committed to keeping violence, drug use, profane language and sexually explicit content out of the hands of our children. We are committed to protecting Australian businesses against unjust lawsuits as a result of a classification system they have no control over. The game industry is estimated to reach $2.5 billion annually by 2015. It is vital that we support this growing trade in this new economy and that we manage the clunky boundaries that dissuade our developers from keeping their businesses here in Australia. The bill will ensure both local and international game developers are able to get their games on the Australian market so that developers and retailers do not miss out. As the games reach Australian soil we can expect to see a boost to game retailers.

Australian gamers are very loyal to their local businesses. The majority of gamers prefer to buy their games from local retailers. However, as highly celebrated games reach international markets and fail to make the Australian MA15 grade, gamers often lean into video game piracy. Gamers face serious fines for importing games that have not been given a classification in Australia, so more and more are turning to internet piracy to obtain the games they want. Our government realises that piracy can have a serious impact on an industry. For Australian game developers and retailers piracy is a very real threat. Small developers depend on trade to support their businesses.

We have recognised that Australian gamers want to buy locally and we have taken action to ensure they can. Supporting our economy means ensuring small businesses such as these have the safeguards to stay afloat with their own means. Labor is working hard to protect Australian enterprises.

The introduction of R18+ restricted classification for video games is an important step for our country. With the ubiquity of gaming mediums—PCs, consoles and smart phones—we can expect gaming to be a growing source of entertainment for Australians. It is essential that we address the risks posed to Australian children and businesses. It is also desirable that we allow adults the opportunity to lead autonomous lives. On this side of the House we are getting the job done. I am very proud to be part of a government that is delivering vital reform to the classification Act. This is a bill that I know has the support of my nephews Nick, Chris and Michael, who are very passionate about their games and very passionate about seeing an R18+ classification.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to welcome the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012, which is before the House today. This is a long-running matter that has finally come to fruition. I think it will be welcomed by many parents and the gaming industry in Australia today.

In 2008 I had the opportunity to speak in this place calling exactly for what is being delivered in this legislation in relation to an R18+ classification for computer games. At the time I was approached by some local parents who had raised their concerns with me about classification of video games with adult themes, and their inability to distinguish those themes by means of the ratings and classifications. In 2008 we were hopeful that the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting of that year, in March, was going to produce some action. Four years later I am happy to say that the states in our wonderfully constructed federation have finally come to the conclusion that there should be an R18+ category for video games—just a little bit later. However, this is a good development. I am, of course, not one who seeks to impose censorship or regulation on what free-thinking adults can view or think. I made that point in 2008, but in my role as Deputy Chair of the Joint Select Committee on Cyber-Safety we learnt of similar issues in relation to children and the application of many laws and schemes to very young and profoundly young children who are able to access video games and online content. I think this is a welcome development. I agree with the argument that there should be consistency between different forms of media under the act, and I believe this approach to video games is common sense.

However, I do not think that this is any substitute for good parenting or responsibility. Indeed, I would make the point to parents in my electorate and more generally in Australia that it is still very much incumbent on them to take responsibility for the video games their children are viewing and to be aware of their content. Any simple or cursory look through most video games in stores today would be enough, I think, to frighten any responsible parent when it comes to the advanced concepts and violence and other graphic depictions within them. I think it is very important that parents do not take the passing of this legislation as a panacea for understanding what concepts exist in video games. It is still going to be first and primarily the responsibility of the parent to determine what their child should be viewing and whether it is appropriate for them and their families.

There is a good argument here about the industry itself which the member for McEwen pointed out: it will be worth $2.5 billion by 2020. This is a large industry today and is only going to get larger. Indeed, the member for Canberra put me onto a book. I do not often read publications recommended to me by the member for Canberra, but it was quite a good read. It concerned an emerging field of neuroscience—this is why I do not read books recommended to me by the member for Canberra—and studies of the development of young people's brains in relation to their use of gaming and online resources. It is a cutting-edge study and approach. We hear a lot about the bad effects of computers or the bad social effects of gaming, but there are positive effects and experimental areas of the brain are being activated by the use of computer games. There is a lot more for us to understand about the interaction of the computer, the brain, gaming and innovation in other areas that will become apparent over time.

Of course we should do what we can to ensure that we do not hinder the development of gaming in Australia or the ability of people to produce and sell games. I think an R18+ classification is a sensible accommodation given the times and where we are today. Speaking of R18+ classifications and adult concepts, I note the member for Moreton has entered the chamber. He is an expert in adult concepts in publications. I also enjoy his publications—that is two publications from Labor members that I have endorsed in this chamber today!

On a more serious note, Australia has 25 major game development studios, which export over $120 million worth of products a year. That achievement should be recognised in the chamber. It should also be noted that Australia is the only Western country that does not have an R18+ classification for games. For the sceptics out there about rating systems and censorship, consistency across markets to ensure that we are competing internationally is a simple and logical argument for us to follow. The UK, EU member countries, the USA and New Zealand all have adult classifications for computer games, and we know that about 88 per cent of Australian households now own a device for playing computer games and that children are engaging more and more in these activities.

The gaming industry in Australia is maturing. A high proportion of today's gamers are now adults; the studies tell us that the average age is about 32. There is a development of more and more computer game titles suited to an older audience, which we are less concerned with in relation to this bill. But we do need this R18+ category, at least as a minimum, to ensure that with this growing demand and the development of gaming in younger and younger children that adult content and advanced concepts are at least identified such that parents are able to understand them in a simple way, consistent with other forms of classification by the federal government. With all of that I am happy to say regarding my earlier statement on behalf of parents who had approached me in my electorate some years ago that it is being done. It took some time to get the states to do something, which of course is a constant frustration shared I think by every member in this place—getting the states to move on any matter; getting them to agree on something can be more difficult. The bureaucracy of our federation, of course, is something I am keen to see improved in the future. But 3½ years after I first spoke about the need for this to be done, it is being done. I welcome it, it is a good development and I support this bill.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak for the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012. As chair of the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs I was pleased to lead the review of this bill. R18+ classification of computer games is an issue that I have received much correspondence about in my electorate, as I am sure most MPs have. It is certainly an issue that was raised quite regularly at my local mobile offices.

The Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee recommended unanimously that this bill pass the House without amendment. We could have called for submissions and held a time-consuming public consultation process but, as the member for Mitchell indicated, this has been a long time coming and the committee noted that there had already been significant consultation. A discussion paper issued by the Attorney-General's Department on the introduction of an R18+ category for computer games received almost 60,000 submissions. Gamers are certainly techno-savvy and know how to communicate. Therefore, the committee did not believe it was necessary for us to duplicate this consultation.

The laws relating to how we classify or rate media are important for allowing consumers to make informed choices about what they see and hear and play. They are important for protecting children and young people from viewing material that is inappropriate. The National Classification Scheme classifies films, including videos and DVDs, computer games and some publications. State and territory governments also have classification legislation in place to enforce this scheme.

Computer games in Australia are a big industry, especially in Queensland, where designers have developed world-class games. I saw the Premier of Queensland the other day at a campaign event for the Business Young Guns. She was actually at the Fruit Ninja Kinect game, which has had one million downloads. She and Deputy Premier Andrew Fraser were playing the Fruit Ninja Kinect game. I am reliably informed by sources in the chamber that it is a very good game. It was developed in Brisbane. Fruit Ninja Kinect has had one million downloads. They have also had Jetpack Joyride, which has had 14 million downloads. These people are able to take their technology and higher skills, use the NBN et cetera and take Australian expertise to the world.

In recent years, while there have a few hiccups, the industry has been experiencing massive growth. The video games industry is now twice the size of the Australian box office and 40 per cent larger than the DVD industry. The Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia says that games industry revenue increased 47 per cent during the 2008 calendar year, reaching nearly $2 billion. This is big business. Motion Picture Distributors Association of Australia figures show just a six per cent increase to $946 million, while revenue for movies sold on DVDs and Blu-ray was up five per cent to $1.4 billion. Comparing those increases you can see where things are heading.

So it is a reasonable question to ask why computer games were treated differently under our current classification laws. Often in this place we are faced with competing interests—the interests of farmers versus miners, developers versus environmentalists, scientists versus sceptics, Warringah versus Wentworth. The challenge for the parliament, for every MP, when faced with competing interests is to strike the right balance—the balance that best serves the national interest. This bill does just that when faced with the dilemma about protecting children from unsuitable computer games and ensuring adults are free to make their own decisions about the sort of games they wish to play. I imagine computer games today are a little different to the Space Invaders I used to play on the St George State High School Commodore 64. That is why the current classification categories for computer games include G, PG, M, and MA15+ or matured accompanied. When it comes to computer games, I know from talking to people who have worked in that industry that it is very hard to classify games because there are lots of nooks and crannies and grottos in the games where people have in the past tried to bring in material that was not appropriate for the classification. There are people who actually sit around and play these games to work out whether the material is appropriate for the classification. Currently, if the games do not fall into the categories I mentioned they are refused classification and, therefore, their sale is prohibited in Australia but not in other countries. I believe there is something called the internet that lets people access these games.

There is currently no rating that restricts computer games to adults as there is with films classified R18+, so this common-sense bill introduces an R18+ category to the classification system for computer games. It follows at least 10 years of negotiations and consultation and has unanimous agreement now from the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. There were some long-term hold-outs but now there is national consensus. There is also strong support in the community for this logical reform, especially in my electorate of Moreton. There is no reason why computer game classification should be treated differently from film classification, and many countries already have a similar classification system in place. The R18+ category will ensure consumers, parents and retailers are well informed about the content of a computer game they choose to buy. There will be a clearer understanding about what is suitable for minors to play and it will help prevent children from accessing unsuitable material.

As I said, this bill strikes the right balance. It protects children from material that may be harmful while ensuring that adults have the freedom to make their own choices about the computer games they play, as long as these games remain within the law. I commend the Minister for Justice for introducing this bill.

Debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:27