X18+ cull on the horizon?
June 15, 2008 – 7:28 pm
Refused Classification has an interesting snippet from Senate Estimates held May 27. In regards to the ‘emergency’ ban on pornography in certain areas of the Northern Territory, Labor Senator Trish Crossin asked whether expanding the ban to include all of the NT and the ACT had been discussed. Classification Board Director, Donald McDonald, and Assistant Secretary of Office of Legal Services Coordination, Janette Davis, are present:
T Crossin - …That is not the matter I want to go to. What I want to ask is: given the fact that the Northern Territory intervention is now nearly nine months on, has either of the boards been involved in any discussions about banning the sale of this material in the Northern Territory?
D McDonald - That would not be a matter for the Classification Board, Senator. That also would be a matter for governments in either jurisdiction.
T Crossin - Ms Davies, can I ask you if that has been a matter for your area?
J Davies - Yes, it has.
T Crossin - To what extent?
J Davies - The amendments that were made last year to the Classification Act which prohibit the supply or possession of certain high-level material, including X18+ films in prescribed areas in the Northern Territory. We had input to those amendments, clearly.
T Crossin - That is true, but I understand you can still purchase this kind of material in Darwin, for example.
J Davies - Yes. It is still legal to sell that material in areas of the Northern Territory, other than the prescribed areas of the Northern Territory.
T Crossin - Yes. Has there been any discussion with you or the department about banning the sale of the material right across the Northern Territory?
J Davies - I am not aware of any discussions.
T Crossin - Who would set predominant legislative requirements for that? Would it be at the territory or federal level at this stage?
J Davies - In general, the legislation dealing with any restrictions on the sale, et cetera, of material at different levels is in state and territory legislation.
T Crossin - Has anything been raised at the SCAG meetings about looking at the availability and the sale of this material across areas such as the ACT and the Northern Territory?
J Davies - No.
T Crossin - So X18+ has not been raised as an issue at all, despite the focus on the objectives of the intervention in the Northern Territory?
J Davies - It may have been touched on in general discussion, but it is certainly not an item that is under consideration.
Trish Crossin was a supporter of the crackdown on pornography in Aboriginal communities.
Also of interest is this (said earlier in the discussion):
J Davies - In general, the prohibitions that relate to X18+ material in the states relate to the sale or display of that material, not to possession. There may be some offences relating to possession in the presence of a minor, but in general it is not unlawful to possess that material in the states; it is unlawful to sell it.
M Shelley - Could I add a clarifying remark, Chair?
T Crossin - Yes, Ms Shelley.
M Shelley - It is illegal to possess it in Queensland, but not in the other states. Queensland is different.
Show me otherwise, but isn’t possession of an X18+ (or objectionable) film only against the law in QLD when you posses it for the purpose of sale or for the purpose of exhibition in a public place? QLD CLASSIFICATION OF FILMS ACT 1991 - SECT 41.
Western Australia’s Classification Act is similar, but it specifically says a person must not possess an unclassified film that would be classified RC, or a film classified RC.
5 Responses to “X18+ cull on the horizon?”
Exactly how is banning porn going to combat child abuse? or anything else for that matter?
Porn is a perfectly harmless entertainment even “release” for some, perhaps many people. Take that away and are they more or less likely to go find what they want/need somewhere more invasive to others then the privacy of their living room?
All this does is appease religious types that like to push their views upon others, for some apparent greater good. Land of the free my ass.
Once again loving the blog
By Adam on Jun 15, 2008
In the case of the Little Children are Sacred report, pornography was supposedly used as a way of encouraging (or preparing) such behaviour.
The Australian Christian Lobby wanted the ban extended to the ACT, as did the Aus Family Association and The Australian Federation of the Family if I recall correctly. To protect children, yeah right.
By Mike on Jun 15, 2008
No doubt restricting Aboriginals from viewing “Marie and Jack”, “Xana and Dax”, and “Damon and Hunter” will go a long way to solving the social ills in the Aboriginal community. If only people had made the connection sooner!
By Tony Comstock on Jun 16, 2008
I think something that always seems to be sidestepped in this discussion is that the material being sold in Aboriginal communities was mostly unclassified illegal porn, not the classified by the OFLC legal porn that can be bought legitimately in the NT and ACT.
So why are they making the legit industry the scape goat and how will banning X-Rated material fix anything? The illegal stuff will spread further. Personally I’d rather not have the extreme porn stuff around, but this is what will happen if you ban the legal stuff.
Also one would think that maybe, just maybe the grog, the lack of meaningful work (or just any work) and the unbroken cycle of abuse and poverty might be the problem here, but no obviously it’s legal porn’s fault.
By Matthew on Jun 16, 2008
It’s all about moral authority isn’t it.
Just have a read of some of the nut job suggestions put forth by Festival of Light in their submission:
It is certainly necessary to consolidate the emergency response by introducing prohibitions on the broadcast of R18+ television programs into Aboriginal communities. However, the complex and limited procedures proposed in the Bill are not adequate. These ought to be replaced by provisions which prohibit any broadcast of a R18+ program into any prescribed area.
The Bill would loosen the prohibition on prohibited material – including X18+ films – in prescribed areas. This is hardly “consolidation”. This provision should be deleted. Instead the Bill should genuinely seek to consolidate the ban on prohibited material – including X18+ films – by extending it throughout the Northern Territory.
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/clac_ctte/NT_emerg_response_08/submissions/sublist.htm
By Mike on Jun 16, 2008