Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day in March 2024:

The adequacy of the current classification system for publications to protect children from age-inappropriate material, including:

(a) the need, if any, for penalties on publishers who fail to meet their obligations under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 to submit potentially offending material to the Classification Board for review; and

(b) any other related matters.

As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I'm speaking this evening in support of my motion to refer the classification system to a Senate inquiry. I've circulated a briefing document to explain this motion, and I hope senators have had time to review the material relating to cartoons for adults, otherwise known as graphic novels, in digital and printed form. The Classification Board administers the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. Not every publication, though, is checked, of course. This would not be feasible. Instead, a system of voluntary referral is in place for questionable publications. That's where the problem is—the system of referral or non-referral.

A publication called The Boys has been available in Australia since the first issue in 1996. This is the same The Boys that Netflix turned into a hit streaming show. Children, having seen the sanitised Netflix version and then seeing the book version on the shelf of their local library, will, of course, pick the book up and borrow it, unaware of the depictions of extreme violence, rape, public sex and bestiality found in the publication. Even more troubling, all of these things are portrayed in a positive light. For 25 years, this material has been perfectly legal to sell, display and lend to minors of any age.

A week after the Classification Board appeared before Senate estimates to answer questions from me and Senator Antic, the board reviewed all six volumes of The Boys as a result of a referral from campaigner, family protector and child protector Bernard Gaynor. A citizen fulfilling his responsibility to the community, to the nation, got it referred to the board. Three volumes were restricted and three were allowed to remain on sale unrestricted, meaning available in libraries to children. One of the banned works, episode 5 in volume 1, was titled 'Herogasm' and chronicled the sexual exploits of our superheroes. Graphic depictions included orgies and bestiality. This behaviour was presented in a positive light, with smiles, high fives, raised fists and whoops all around.

Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. I'll say that again. Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 does not prescribe a penalty on a publisher who does not refer a work that may be subject to sanction.

That's an incentive to not submit a work. This is one of the terms of reference of this motion. Penalties may be appropriate for a publisher who failed to submit a work that was subsequently restricted.

One of the volumes that was not banned depicted the male lead character, Homelander, raping the lead female character, Starlight, complete with protestations, using language that should not be suitable for children. The board declined to restrict the volume because the nudity in the rape scene was not overly graphic. What about the rape? All senators and members of parliament are required to take a course on sensitivity to women. The Classification Board clearly needs to attend the same training. The second justification for not restricting the volume is even worse. It was, 'The two characters both climaxed, suggesting the sex was not rape but consensual.' The Classification Board is apparently bringing back, 'But she came'—the old rape defence. Where are the women's activists? Where are the Greens talking about women now? They're nowhere to be seen.

Another graphic novel currently on sale and on display in libraries unrestricted by the Classification Board is Nagano, which depicts sexual behaviour featuring girls who are actually labelled in the illustration as being seven years old, just in case there was any doubt about who these comics are really aimed at.

Now we have the book Welcome to Sex. The authors are Yumi Stynes, Melissa Kang and Jenny Latham. It's published by international publishing house Hardie Grant Children's Publishing. Much has been said about this publication in recent weeks. For those who have not read it, let me explain a little about this book. The publication is officially aimed at ages 10 and up, with author Yumi Stynes publicly stating that she would have no problem with an eight-year-old reading the book. Certainly some of the information in this book will help adolescents come to terms with their changing bodies and their relationships around that process. If the authors had stopped there, we would have no problem. They didn't stop there. The second half of this book is nothing short of an instruction manual on how to perform adult sex acts, commencing with advice to young girls to take their own virginity with a hairbrush and then moving onto hand jobs, sex and even anal sex, ending with advice on how to send naked selfies. This is all in a book published for ages 10 and up. How is it legal to advise kids to have sex before they are legally able and to send illegal child pornography and to advise children to ignore the counsel of their own parents? How is this legal? Ten-year-old children cannot have sex and should not be tutored on how to do so.

It may be that this material is being sold because the Classification Board only has the choice between 'unrestricted' and R18+, which is restricted to sale in plain wrappers to adults. In effect, the current classification system has no jump between Cat in the Hat and actual porn. All publications become either one or the other. Legislation written in 1995 simply didn't envisage this trend of graphic novels that are sexually violent and exploitative material that one could describe as child-grooming material.

Children are far more valuable than this. I'm asking the committee to decide if there should be more steps in the classification options so material like this can be allowed for sale to adolescents old enough to actually engage in the sexual practices explained in this publication. After all, the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 does require the board to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation, abuse and pornographic material. This publication is pornographic. Restricting a publication like this is not book burning, as some have suggested, some who are afraid of a debate. One Nation is not calling for the book to be banned. We are suggesting this book should be classified in a way that prevents young children from reading it. That is not book burning. That is basic decency reflecting community standards that say teaching 10-year-olds how to have anal sex is just plain wrong. A legally binding MA15+ classification would achieve that. I ask for the Senate's support for my motion.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will not be supporting the referral. The classification scheme provides for the Classification Board to classify films, computer games and certain publications. Australians rely on classification to make informed media choices, especially when it comes to what content to show to their kids, but successive reviews have found that the classification system is long overdue for reform. In March this year the government announced a two-stage process to reform the classification framework. The government will commence consultation later this year and welcomes the participation of all those interested in the classification scheme through that process.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition will not oppose this motion. The national classification scheme is important. It sets out the regulatory framework for the classifying of films, computer games and publications. The work of the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board can have significant impacts on businesses that rely on these bodies to publish, screen and sell their products, including films, games and books, and the classifications themselves are very important for many of us in the community who rely on them when watching, playing or reading the items which are classified. The Classification Board reports to this parliament and is accountable to this place for their actions.

Ralph Babet (Victoria, United Australia Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously, I rise in support of Senator Roberts's motion. I have read the book Welcome to Sex. I've read the book and, let me tell you in this place right now, it is filth; it is degeneracy; it is disgusting. My problem with the book is not just that it speaks to children; it's that in our society today we have become so comfortable with sexualising children—with sexualising our most vulnerable—and I will tell you all right now that it is wrong.

We must protect children. It has become so apparent that the current system is inadequate. Publishers are only required to submit a book for classification if they themselves believe the book may require it. It's akin to—I don't know—a Scouts honour type of system. Scouts honour: I promise it's all good; don't worry about it. Well, mate, it's not all good, because we've seen the content in this book and other books, which I'm sure some of my fellow senators will talk about after I am done with my contribution.

Publishers are releasing books which are inappropriate for children. We all know that; that's clear. And children are being exposed to this material, which is obscene. It's degenerate; it's filthy. I'm going to keep harping on about it because that's exactly what it is. I believe that penalties must apply to publishers who fail to meet their obligations under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. They've got to feel the pain. These people need to be punished and penalised. They're degenerates.

Since my first day in this place, my office has been inundated, swamped and overwhelmed with calls from concerned parents, grandparents, teachers—every one relating to publications that are accessible to children that they deem to be unsuitable. I say to people at home watching this broadcast on social media: if you don't think that there is a war being waged against children in this nation right now, well, you haven't been paying attention, or maybe you just haven't visited your local bookstore or gone to your local library lately. There is a war on for the souls and the minds of this nation's children. That's what's going on.

I obviously believe in preserving the innocence of children. When I first became aware of the inappropriate book titled Welcome to Sex, which my colleague Senator Malcolm Roberts spoke about previously, I decided that, as a society, we had to draw a line in the sand. We had to say, 'Enough is enough. Stop coming after the kid.'

This book is obviously marketed at preteen children, but, as was mentioned previously, the author, Yumi Stynes, said that she would be happy for a mature eight-year-old to read the book. A mature eight-year-old does not exist.

I bought a copy of that book myself, and I can tell you right now that there are things that I as a grown adult learnt from that book—and I can never unlearn them. It was disgusting. It's degeneracy. This book talks about all kinds of sex acts, and it provides instructions and graphic illustrations on how to complete these adult sex acts. I won't name them, because I want this video to be seen by people and not to be censored on YouTube, Facebook, X and Instagram. I want people to see it, so I can't mention the sex acts, but they're that bad.

Adults: you can do whatever the heck you like; nobody cares what you do. You're over 18. You're an adult—each to their own. But why are Australian retail stores selling material like this aimed at children? Obviously, and most importantly, why isn't the book classified? That's my issue. Classify that book. Publishers have to do their jobs, and, if they don't do their jobs, they've got to face harsh penalties. We cannot put a price on children's innocence. Children's innocence must be protected. Let them be kids for as long as possible. Let them enjoy their childhoods. Don't fill their heads with garbage.

On 19 July I wrote to the Labor Party communications minister, Michelle Rowland, expressing my immediate concern about this book. 'Why is it unclassified, Minister Rowland?' Minister Rowland hasn't replied to my letter. I'm not surprised. Does Minister Rowland care about children? I certainly hope so. Minister Rowland, reply to my letter. Show that you care. The title itself, let alone the harmful content, should have prompted the publishers to submit the book for classification. There is the loophole right there. It's up to them to determine whether they should submit their own book for classification, and that needs to change. On 21 July I wrote a similar letter to the deputy secretary of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, who oversees the operation of Australian classifications. They are the entity responsible for the classification of children's books. I questioned if they would exercise their authority to call in this book and other books, and I have yet to receive a reply from them also.

This book and all the other books—all the other filth and garbage out there, all the other indoctrination of our children out there, all those publications that seek to sexualise kids—have been met with public outcry. It is clearly not in line with what the public expects and not in line with community standards. This is just one of many books that requires urgent review. The current classification system obviously needs reforming and strengthening. We can all agree on that, I hope. Let's not play party politics with the innocence of children, because that's rubbish. Let's not do that anymore. It needs reforming. We must not allow publishers to continue to release material targeted at prepubescent and preteen children. We can't allow them to do it. It's adult content. Obviously, I commend Senator Roberts for his motion. I and the entirety of the United Australia Party stand with him. If you're a member of the United Australia Party, and you don't stand with me and Malcolm Roberts right here and right now, cancel your membership, because we don't want you in the party. Go and join the Labor Party. Go and join the Greens. Maybe even go and join the Liberal Party. You're not welcome in the UAP. The UAP will not stand for this garbage.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again—

Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Ralph Babet (Victoria, United Australia Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

thank you, Senator Hanson—leave the kids alone. Stop sexualising children. To my friends and colleagues in the Liberal Party, you've got to stand up. You've got to stand for something, because right now, guys and girls, the public sees you as Labor lite. That's why you keep losing elections and why you will continue to lose in the future. You've got to stand for something. I've read your 'we believe' statement, a tour de force in freedom, in what's good and right in the world and in conservative values. All you need to do is stick to your 'we believe' statement, because, if you won't stick to your 'we believe' statement, don't worry, the UAP is here. We're going to nip away at you and take every darn seat you have, eventually—not today, but in the future. You guys have got to stand up. If you don't stand up for kids, that's the end of you. This is it, your line in the sand. Forget about the Greens and the Labor Party. They're cooked; we know that. It's up to you guys, and, if you don't do it, I will.

Alex Antic (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the motion this evening, and I want to illustrate the importance of this motion by way of a recent interaction I had with a local constituent in the northern suburbs of South Australia, where I am the paired senator. My first opportunity to come into contact with this single mother with three children was through a deputation she made to the local council. She bravely approached the local council, which is a very brave thing to do, bringing to their attention the presence of a particular book called Let's Talk About It. This is not the book that Senator Babet referred to but is a book containing graphic depictions of sexual practices, adult concepts and in one instance a detailed manifesto, if you like, as to how to send naked selfies across the internet. The book was marketed at children, and she was alarmed by the fact that it was available to children in the library and was completely unclassified.

This brave mother took her fight to the council. She then took it to the ombudsman. She took it to a number of politicians, and finally she took it to the Classification Board, which cost her the princely sum of around $800 in order to have this book considered for classification. She put together a submission, outlined her concerns and sought a waiver of the fee, I might say, which was rejected. Bearing her own costs and using her own time, this brave mother sought to have this book classified so it could at least be removed from public libraries, where children like her own were likely to see the book in circulation. Ultimately, she went round and round the mulberry bush, so to speak. The Classification Board rejected the application, and the book remains unclassified. She's now been told that she can send it off to the Classification Review Board for the princely sum of $10,000, which she of course does not have.

I raise this in the context of this motion, which I support, because this interaction highlights the frailties of the system. As Senator Roberts rightly pointed out earlier, the prevalence of this material in local libraries and our children now being subjected to this material was never conceived of when the law was enacted in 1995 and through subsequent amendments. This piece of legislation has an enormous loophole, in my view, one I raised during the last Senate estimates hearings with the director. The issue is that books are not automatically reviewed, as is the case for films and movies. In fact, publications are subject to a self-reporting requirement for the publisher, and the publisher is only required to do that if it is submittable content. Therefore, it is a value judgement placed on the publisher.

Through that loophole these books are finding their way into circulation and into libraries, where children have the opportunity to see them. The onus is being put upon private citizens like this brave mother to seek their classification, and there are other instances I'm aware of where private citizens have sought classification of these books. This simply cannot be right. It cannot be accepted, and we simply cannot have this material in the hands of our kids remaining unclassified. As Senator Babet said, kids grow up too fast these days. Parents don't need to be concerned about what kids might be borrowing from the library and bringing home.

The issue of sexual education is not the issue here. That's been around since time immemorial. But these books are ostensibly trojan horses for radical gender theory dressed up as sex education for our kids, and we need to call them out for what they are. These are not simple education manuals. They are books enclosing radical gender theory, and we need to have this review. I support the motion and I encourage all those in this chamber that care about the kids to support the motion as well.

Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion of my colleague Senator Roberts. The existing classifications for books, films and computer games need to be reviewed. While those on the left have no problem exposing children to extremely harmful material, most Australians have a superior morality. This was evident in the outrage of the Australian community at Big W stores stocking a children's book with explicit pornographic images and instructions on how to perform various sex acts. It even had instructions on sending images of naked children, which is unlawful in Australia. Big W took the book off the shelves, but it remains for sale online and on Amazon. The author of this piece of filth says she would have no problem with a mature eight-year-old reading the book. It is a contradiction of terms. There's no such thing. This incident is just the latest of many in Australia and overseas of harmful material being marketed at children.

It is therefore appropriate we have an honest examination of the current classification system to ensure it is fit for purpose and is protecting children from exposure to harmful material. The impassioned comments tonight from Senator Roberts and also Senator Babet and Senator Antic are indicative of what the Australian people, commonsense Australian people, think. If this is going to be completely thrown out tonight and doesn't get up in the vote, then I do question the people in this chamber. I think it would be disgusting if you didn't take the concerns of the Australian people seriously, because there was an outcry when they heard about the book being on the shelves in Big W, to the extent that they actually took the book out of that store.

The author said that she has no problems with a mature eight-year-old reading it. Well, I'm a grandmother that has an eight-year-old grandson, who will be turning nine this week. I have another one that turned nine last April. I'd be absolutely flabbergasted and horrified if they picked up this book, because I don't believe at this stage in their lives they should be reading this rubbish. I picked up the book and flicked through it, and I saw the pages in it: 'How to have anal sex', and then you had two women having sex together also. This is just disgusting—the whole book.

For you to not consider that this should be reclassified—it's not what the Australian people want. It's the same as what you've done to me in this chamber with gender dysphoria. You actually have turned a blind eye to what is happening to our children out there. You know what I'll say to you? If you're going to vote this down, and if you're going to vote against the gender dysphoria motion, there are a lot of sick puppies in this place. There really are. You really need to actually consider what you are voting on. People out there expect us, as leaders of this nation, to protect our children, and if you vote this down you're not protecting children.

I hear you speak highly of paedophiles who are preying on our children. You make out that you're really concerned about this.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Acting Deputy President: I ask Senator Hanson to withdraw. She was clearly not speaking through the chair, and she said 'you' and 'paedophiles'.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson, let me rule, please. I was listening carefully, and I was watching the hand gestures. I didn't see you specifically point, but I would ask you, Senator Hanson, to make your remarks through the chair, please.

Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Most definitely—no problem. What I was saying is that we need to address what is actually happening here with our children in this country, and I'm sick and tired of the alphabet people that are pushing their own agendas on our children. What I'll say to people here is: leave our children alone. I say that on behalf of many, many Australians who have children of their own, and I say it on my own behalf as a grandmother. Leave the children alone.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting this referral. The classification scheme provides for the Classification Board to classify films, computer games and certain publications. Australians rely on classifications to make informed media choices, especially when it comes to what content to show their kids, but successive reviews have found that the classification system is long overdue for reform.

In March this year, the government announced a two-stage process to reform the classification framework. The government will commence consultation later this year and welcomes the participation of all those interested in the classification scheme through that process.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the reference to the Environment and Communications References Committee, standing in the name of Senator Roberts, be agreed to. A division having been called, I remind honourable senators that we are past division time, and the division will be deferred until tomorrow.