Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

I will answer from the point of view of the opposition; the minister may want to deal with some of the other aspects, Senator. You are correct in that it is certainly our view that we should simply put a blanket ban on the extension of R18+ material. The differential clearly is that there is a process of, as they say, consultation and a process where the government will require one person or part of the community to put their hand up and say: ‘We feel vulnerable. We somehow feel threatened. There are things within our community that might need special consideration, so we would like that transmission to end.’

I will give the minister the opportunity to answer a couple of things, but while I am on my feet could I deal with the Greens’ submission. I acknowledge I was not there with the committee, Senator Siewert, but I did hear about it and I understand it is a very complicated issue for a child to be involved when a subscription is that complicated. There are a whole range of issues within that.

I guess my concern is, from anecdotal reports that I have, that this exact system had extensive use prior to the intervention. I do not know how it happened. Adults may have been involved. I am not sure how the children worked it out. But, because they were unsupervised for a long period of time, they have developed skills that are not normally associated with people of that age. That is my concern. I do recognise that it may seem to be such a long bow when you hear those sorts of submissions. I will not take you up on the issue of it being expensive. I understand that you think that there may be better things to spend it on in the general context, but I certainly think that this is very important at any cost. I do know that you really understand and sympathise with these circumstances, Senator, and I know that you are aware that there are pockets and demographics of children in these communities that have already been exposed to high levels of this material. I know that there is far worse material, but my concern is that exposure to any further extent—even to R18+ material for short periods of time—may rekindle issues. I am not sure about the technical details of it, but the fact that they have already been exposed puts them in a whole new area than what would be accepted under normal circumstances. We believe that these are not normal circumstances, so we need to take further steps. But I do understand the thrust of what you are saying; I am not being critical.

In terms of the government, perhaps the term ‘mischievous’ switched me on to a slightly new level, Minister, but I will do my best. The Rudd government in their first-100-day report said, ‘We are extending the ban.’ I am not sure how many Australians can do their sums. Perhaps those in the gallery might have a crack at it. Today there is zero per cent chance of R18+ pornography being transmitted into communities. On the day of assent, it will be 100 per cent. You can do the maths and say that that is an extension of the ban; in fact, it is quite the reverse. I object to being called ‘mischievous’. I believe that the opposition and most involved in this process—