Gillard acknowledges fears over internet filter

Renai LeMay
07 July 2010, 6:16 PM


... but says she has confidence that Stephen Conroy will sort out the glitches in the policy.


update New Prime Minister Julia Gillard today said she understands concerns about the Government’s controversial mandatory internet filtering policy, but Communications Minister Stephen Conroy was putting effort in to get the policy into shape.

Just yesterday Gillard’s office ducked a series of questions about the filter policy amidst speculation her ascension to the Prime Ministership could signal a change in the policy.

But this morning the politician was less taciturn on ABC local radio in Darwin, responding to what the presenter said was “quite a few listeners who want me to ask you about the proposed internet filter — time to get rid of it, or at least an opt-in or opt-out system”.

“Well look, I know that there is some concern here, and I believe that the Minister, Senator Stephen Conroy, has been trying to work through to get a resolution,” Gillard said. “I think the competing tensions are we obviously want, you know, a fast internet that meets people’s needs, that’s why we’re rolling out the National Broadband [Network].”

“But there’s also a set of concerns about the dark side of the new technology, if I can use that expression, and, you know, clearly you can’t walk into a cinema in Australia and see certain things and we shouldn’t on the internet be able to access those things either. So, Stephen Conroy is working to get this in the right shape.”

One listener — named Stuart — emailed the ABC stating that it was hard not to draw parallels between China’s oppressive internet regime and the filter policy. In response, Gillard said she was “happy with the policy aim”.

“The policy aim is, you know, if there are images of child abuse, child pornography, they are not legal in our cinemas. You would not be able to go to the movies and watch that, and you shouldn’t,” the new Prime Minister said. “I mean, no-one should want to see that, but you’re not able to go to the movies and see those kinds of things. Why should you be able to see them on the internet? I think that that’s the kind of, you know, moral, ethical question at the heart of this.”

However, Gillard noted there was a set of “technical concerns” about internet speed, and also concern that the policy could affect legitimate use of the internet. “It’s not my intention that we in any way jeopardise legitimate use of the internet, but I think all of would share repulsion for some of the things that can be accessed through the internet,” she said.

The comments represent the first time Gillard has commented publicly on the filter policy since winning the Labor leadership several weeks ago.

Her predecessor Kevin Rudd had publicly defended the policy several times, on one occasion noting he would not apologise for the policy.

Labor Senator Kate Lundy has previously said she believes the change in leadership could present an opportunity for the policy to change, and is lobbying the Labor caucus to insert opt-in or opt-out provisions into the filter legislation. But Communications Minister Stephen Conroy did not respond directly when asked last week whether he had spoken to Gillard about Lundy’s amendments.

Gillard also took the chance in the radio interview to sideswipe the Opposition on the National Broadband Network policy. “We’re committed to it, obviously [Opposition Leader] Tony Abbott’s committed to taking it away,” she said.

Delimiter


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

franko12345 (New user):

Bye Bye labour
Bye Bye liberals
Hello Greens

07 July 2010, 6:51 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (New user):

Quoting franko12345:
Hello Greens

What will greens do "Jute to the Node"? Let those green flapwits have any say and you wont have electricity let alone broadband.

Bye Bye stupid ideas!!!


07 July 2010, 8:53 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

JGrant (New user):

It's the storing of web history, emails and internet phone calls which is surely more of an issue than the filter right? These are rights the authorities used to need a warrant to access.

07 July 2010, 7:29 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

I Geek and I Vote (New user):

It is sad that Kate Lundy is the only person in the Labor Govt that is making any sense on this issue.
Looks like the Greens will do very well out of opposing the filter and other and the other invasions of privacy the major parties want to impose.

07 July 2010, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TV Bis (New user):

Quoting I Geek and I Vote:
Looks like the Greens will do very well out of opposing the filter and other and the other invasions of privacy the major parties want to impose.

When will people understand that the internet is not private, it is public domain. Why do you really need privacy when using the web? I regard the web as a conduit for sending and receiving information. I know that whatever I do can be tracked whether I like it or not so what is the problem?????????????????????




07 July 2010, 8:44 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (New user):

Quoting TV Bis:
When will people understand that the internet is not private, it is public domain. Why do you really need privacy when using the web? I regard the web as a conduit for sending and receiving information. I know that whatever I do can be tracked whether I like it or not so what is the problem?

Being tracked is only a problem for people who have something to hide, no worries there. Some toad like Conroy decided what is appropriate for me to access, and him being able to obscure it from view without reference or accountability is a different issue entirely and will never be tolerable. It is step one towards political manipulation of information and that is not going to happen in this country.

Vote Conroy's party to oblivion at the earliest opportunity, and take his meddlesome and devious influence away!!!




07 July 2010, 9:04 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (User):

Quoting TV Bis:
Why do you really need privacy when using the web?


Well, I don't really care from that view, but I do care about costs rising... How many terabytes of data will even small ISPs be required to keep? And how about bigger ISPs?

08 July 2010, 10:40 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

muttzz (New user):

I absolutely can not believe that both of these creeps want to equate any opposition to the filter as being equivalent to people wanting to view child porn/terrorist or other illegal material.

With this they clearly demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding which precludes them from being qualified to make any judgements on this subject matter whatsoever.

The fact that we can have individuals who are so ignorant in control of such large purse strings is amazing to me.

08 July 2010, 5:02 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

J876 (User):

A quote from Ms. Gillard:

"The policy aim is, you know, if there are images of child abuse, child pornography, they are not legal in our cinemas. You would not be able to go to the movies and watch that, and you shouldn’t,” the new Prime Minister said. “I mean, no-one should want to see that, but you’re not able to go to the movies and see those kinds of things. Why should you be able to see them on the internet? I think that that’s the kind of, you know, moral, ethical question at the heart of this.”

Accessing these materials is already illegal. I remember a time when Australians were vocal about China's contraversial internet censorship polocies. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

08 July 2010, 8:45 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (User):

Quoting J876:
Accessing these materials is already illegal.


But I read it on the internet, so doesn't that make it 100% correct and legal?

08 July 2010, 11:24 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

J876 (User):

No, just like people speeding in their cars. There is nothing stopping you from speeding in your car but if you exceed the speed limit you are breaking the law. If this activity wasn't illegal already why are there people convicted for accessing this material?

08 July 2010, 1:37 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (User):

What? People break speeding laws? We'd better put a filter on that too!

08 July 2010, 2:32 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user