Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Coonan. I draw the minister’s attention to reports last year which revealed that all of Sweden’s 11 top telecommunications providers have agreed to block internet child pornography. If Sweden’s top telecommunications providers can block pornography, why can’t Australia’s tier 1 ISPs do the same?

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Fielding for the question and for his interest in what is a significant issue for all parents in the community, indeed all families and the community more broadly. I am not sure that Senator Fielding’s information is correct but if ISP providers wish to provide filters at server level that is entirely a matter for them. What is the case, and I think I can say this without contradiction, is that there is simply no government in the developed world that has mandated, insisted on or endorsed server-level filtering. I think I am correct in saying that. If Senator Fielding can provide other information, I am very interested to hear it.

As I have said, the difficulties with server-level filtering are quite significant. This government has looked at it on three separate occasions: in 1999 in a CSIRO technical trial; in 2003-04 as part of the review of the online content scheme; and in late 2005 in a trial conducted by NetAlert that involved the RMIT and ACMA, the regulator. Indeed, there is another trial going on in Launceston and I will look very critically at that. Each report has found very significant problems with content filter products operating at that level, such that they tend to overblock all forms of content, including quite innocent content that needs to be accessed for quite legitimate purposes. They have been unable to effectively scale up to a larger network. These systems have been known to have problems on a smaller network in a very controlled environment, and the ability to scale up to a large network is very difficult to achieve.

They have been unable to analyse and block websites based on more sophisticated techniques such as skin tones. Many have provided no protection at all for children using chat rooms. Children are totally vulnerable under this arrangement to predators approaching them on chat rooms through peer to peer, through file downloading or through email traffic. None of the ISP filters that have been tested will block that kind of trash that affects our kids. Many do not allow the ability to customise filtering levels so that parents can do something to control the level of content that they get so that different members of the family can have different access arrangements. They do not allow parents to log children’s activities so there cannot be any parental monitoring. We think the drawbacks are significant and that PC based filters, if properly understood and installed, provide the best opportunity to effectively address this very pernicious pornography and to enable parents to take control and to make the right decisions on behalf of their children.

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

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy does not care about it, Senator Fielding, and thinks that it is a huge joke. This government regards it as an incredibly important policy initiative and I am looking forward to shortly announcing an enhanced arrangement to stop this pernicious traffic on the net.

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I note the minister’s answer, and I look forward to bringing the minister up to date with what is happening in Sweden. Minister, given the federal government is still the majority shareholder in Telstra, if the government is serious about protecting Australian children from pornography, why does it not require Telstra to participate in the internet filtering trial in Tasmania?

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I will be looking forward to is Senator Fielding telling me what country in the world mandates ISP-level filtering. I will be very interested if Senator Fielding wants to bring me up to date on that information, because I think he is dead wrong. However, what is important is that this government will continue to take the most effective action that we possibly can to deal with this issue on the net. Because technology changes, we will not rule out looking ultimately at ISP filtering but we are certainly not going to interfere in the commercial arrangements of providers and we will continue to do the very best we can with PC based filters.

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would remind the minister about the question that I asked requiring Telstra to participate in the internet filtering trial in Tasmania. That is what the supplementary question was about.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She never answers questions!

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the minister has completed her answer.