INTERNET FILTERING

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (12:56): I move:

That this house condemns the federal Labor government's introduction of internet filtering.

The previous motion certainly was a very important motion and I am pleased it has occupied the time of the house that it has. In the few minutes left to me before lunch, I will speak to this motion and seek leave to continue my remarks. As we all know, the Rudd Labor government is proposing to introduce a system of internet filtering that will be compulsory. It will involve all Australians, all ISP providers. It will involve everyone in this nation and it will filter their ability to access information that should not be filtered.

We have just discussed a motion about past history that needs to be remembered. We need to access information that will enlighten us all on issues such as that, but there are other areas about which people also need to access information and, with the introduction of internet filtering by the federal Labor government, that will be severely restricted. There are some sites that genuinely need to be filtered and excluded. They are mainly the pornographic sites–and I will list some of those later on.

Let us see what the federal Minister for Communications, Stephen Conroy, said on the SBS Insight program on 31 March 2009 when asked about internet filtering. He said:

Look, if there's an argument that the internet should be unregulated we'll have to at the end of the day, agree to disagree. I'm a huge supporter of the civil society and the internet is the Wild West at the moment. I think—I repeat again—there's been, unfortunately a lot of misinformation spread about what our intent actually is. I was more than happy to accept to come on the show to make sure that people understood—we are talking almost exclusively about refused classification. Then we want to give parents an option…

There is no option in this, everyone will be included. Unlike the federal Liberal government plan for NetAlert, which was voluntary—you could opt into a filtering system—this is not an optional program. This is a program that will be forced upon all Australians and, while well meaning, the actual outcome will be a disaster for internet access in Australia.

I will talk about the countries that have introduced internet filtering in my next contribution because I only have a minute or two left before the luncheon break. Stephen Conroy said that they want to give parents an option. There is no option in this. This is the whole point of this plan by the Rudd Labor government. If it was an option, I would be wholeheartedly supporting it, provided it was not an option that was going to slow down the internet to the extent that I am advised it is. The federal minister is poorly advised on this and he should listen to public opinion. With those remarks, I seek leave to continue my remarks at the next opportunity.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.