Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Collins for her question. On 18 December, after the government announced its position on ISP filtering, Reporters Without Borders wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister to explain why they objected to it. It is fair to say they clearly had not read the government’s policy when they argued:

Filtering would be applied to all content considered “inappropriate” ...

The government was very clear in its announcement that our policy is to require ISPs to block a defined list of URLs of content which has been classified as RC under Australia’s existing national classification scheme. Reporters Without Borders say they do not know whether content will be blocked by keywords, URL or something else. As the government stated just three days before the letter was published, a defined list of URLs of specific web pages or images will be blocked—very specifically.

Reporters Without Borders suggests that under the government’s policy—and, again, I quote the letter:

... subjects such as abortion, anorexia, aborigines and legislation on the sale of marijuana would all risk being filtered, as would media reports on these subjects.

This either shows a distinct lack of understanding of the government’s policy, Australia’s existing classification scheme or both. What it does show is that Reporters Without Borders have not been well informed or have neglected to find out the facts in compiling their report. It is very disappointing that a normally reputable organisation has been so badly misled. (Time expired)