Senator Simon Birmingham firmly against compulsory filtering
January 23, 2009 – 12:21 amSouth Australian Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham has described Kevin Rudd’s filtering policy as an ill-considered and dangerous policy with the potential to inflict serious harm on a variety of levels.
Senator Scott Birmingham
In a letter to a Whirlpool member, Birmingham says Labor’s compulsory filtering would potentially dramatically slow internet access at a time when Australia needs faster internet access and risks making parents become complacent in monitoring their children’s use of the internet.
The letter is published below in full.
Thankyou for your comprehensive and considered letter outlining your concerns in regards to compulsory internet filtering.
Let me assure you that I share your views in regards to Labor’s compulsory internet filtering program. This is an ill-considered and dangerous policy with the potential to inflict serious harm on a variety of levels.
I believe the right to free speech is fundamental to the Australian way of life and to Australian values. It should only be restricted in the most extreme circumstances.
As such, I will consider the Labor proposal for compulsory internet filtering at the ISP level therough the prism of maintaining free speech whereve possible and struggle to envisage circumstances in which I would support it. Whilst I acknowledge the need to protect children from undesirable elements on the internet, the proposed compulsory filtering risks being flawed in both ideology and practice.
Labor’s compulsory filtering would potentially dramatically slow internet access at a time when Australia needs faster internet access. You are right to highlight the absurdity of Senator Conroy’s bizarre remarks on this issues and his refusal to address the conflict between his competing goals.
The former Liberal government made free filters available to parents around the country. Placing responsibility in the home is the best way to ensure that children do not access inappropriate material online, through both voluntary access to filters and closely monitoring the internet use of children.
Of paramount concern to me is the risk that parents may become complacent in monitoring their children’s use of the internet if a mandatory filter is introduced. If Senator Conroy thinks that blocking access to child pornography will make the internet safe for children, he is severely misguided. There are many dangers for children online, ranging from chat rooms to sites about drugs, legal pornography, racism etc.
Furthermore, the technological capabilities of current filters make accurate filtering impossible. As you have outline in some detail, the testing of filters to date has been flawed and failures brushed aside.
I have questioned this proposal in Senate Estimates from the earliest days of the Labor governments and will continue to fight this proposal and hope that senator Conroy backs down from what is an untenable position.
Thankyou again for taking the time to bring your concerns on this important matter to my attention.
6 Responses to “Senator Simon Birmingham firmly against compulsory filtering”
Well it’s good to see that the libs are of one mind on this.
Now let’s see if we can get a Labor polly to see reason.
By websinthe on Jan 23, 2009
I just downloaded Mark Newton’s form letter, to be sent to ALP members if they respond to anyone’s letter, just by mass-mailing the same bulls**t that Conroy has made up.
By Glenn Petrie on Jan 23, 2009
Good to see that some politicians are willing to respond personally rather than just replying with an automated form, regardless of their stance on the issue.
The fact that those opposed to the filter are willing to write personal responses while those who are for it are not seems a good indication of which side knows what they’re talking about.
By HTA on Jan 23, 2009
This is the Liberal Pary at its best and a good example of why we need a genuine classical Liberal Party in this country to counter the patronising overtures of Labor. We can only hope that the Liberals contiune to support indivudal freedoms, particularly the freedom of speech as this political cycle wears on.
By The Patrician on Jan 23, 2009
@The Patrician I don’t know where you get that idea.
The Libs and Nats will vote for censorship because they started the ball rolling with the “Communications Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002″ which puts ACMA behind a firewall against FOI requests. The Libs and Nats also sold out our patent law and copyright law to vested American interests. Labour is simply fulfilling its obligations under the AUSFTA and talking about CP as a distraction and Conroy can’t believe his luck. Everybody wants to talk about s*x.
The prohibited content that Conroy talks about has always been illegal file sharing which was criminalised as required by the AUSFTA, once again, a Liberal initiative. If you think that P2P can’t or won’t be stopped, guess again.
This legislation will go though, in more ways than one, so just drop your tweeds, bend over, and grit your teeth.
Your screwed!
By Bill on Jan 24, 2009
According to the Canberra Times..
BY JAMES MASSOLA
23/01/2009 1:00:00 AM
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/broadband-report-in-ministers-hands/1414483.aspx
The Federal Government’s trial of ISP-level filtering the ”clean feed” that will filter content for all Australian internet users was supposed to begin on December 24 last year.
But a spokeswoman for the minister could not provide a revised starting date.
—————————-
Perhaps this impassioned plea from Helen Razer (in an opinion piece in the Sydney Morning Herald) may help influence the Minister..
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/hey-senator–leave-us-discerning-viewers-of-pornography-alone/2009/01/23/1232471591602.html
Helen Razer
January 24, 2009
————–
According to some, this particular ministerial blogger has been nothing short of bolshie. To those who fear their speech will be stifled, or their net access slowed, he has offered a stubborn response: if you’re opposed to the department’s cyber-safety plan, you are opposed to the protection of children.
His evangelical logic seems lost on many, and not only civil liberties groups who are unhappy with his Reverend Lovejoy decree. Much of the IT community is adamant the clean feed will slow our connectivity. Normally moderate thinkers are horrified that we’re taking cultural cues from China and North Korea. Even some child protection workers gently suggest that federal attention and funds would be better disbursed elsewhere.
Nonetheless, it remains difficult to counter the won’t-someone-think-of-the-children reasoning without being branded a perve. Upright people are trying, though. They’ve been loud and eloquent in their censure.
It’s time for the less seemly to have their say. It’s time for fans of Voltaire, and his civil biographer, Miss Hall, to defend to the death the tastes of people like me. It’s time to ask: “Won’t someone think of the porn fans?”
I enjoy pornography. Perhaps not quite so much as I enjoy living among citizens who take an entitlement to free speech for granted. But I do like it quite a lot. And it seems that my porn is endangered.
If Conroy’s clean feed works, which some tech sceptics argue that it cannot, it will prevent access to all pornography. According to the interpretation of Electronic Frontiers Australia and other advocates, the clean feed will mean that garden-variety X-rated material may not be viewed online in Australian territory. Further, R18+ content will be prohibited. And MA15+ sites hosted in Australia will probably go as well. According to the communication authority’s criteria, everything saucy must go.
This will certainly save many Australian adults thousands of hours. This will possibly save a handful of unsupervised minors from harm.
and the one time radio broadcaster continues..
The usefulness of the World Wide Web is threatened by Conroy. I have found the medium terribly instructive. When I am lacking culinary inspiration, I will browse a recipe database. When my writing is misfiring, I catch up with The New Yorker. And when my boudoir has become as flavourless as my writing or my food, I go to a website that propriety will not permit me to divulge.
==============
By Bob Bain on Jan 25, 2009