Labor Senator argues against net censorship

Renai LeMay
03 February 2010, 2:38 PM


Legislation for internet filtering will hit parliament as early as this month, but Labor Senator Kate Lundy says she is fighting for an opt-out option.


The legislation to introduce the Federal Government’s controversial internet filtering scheme is on track to land in Parliament as early as late February or early March, according to Labor Senator Kate Lundy (pictured right).

“My understanding is that the bills are not going to be introduced this week and next week is Senate Estimates so it will probably be in the following sitting fortnight in February or later in March,” Lundy wrote on her blog overnight.

The legislation will introduce mandatory filtering of the internet for Australians at the internet service provider level, with the aim of screening out objectionable content that has been refused classification on our shores.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has previously flagged March as the due date for draft versions of the filter legislation to be introduced into Parliament, with actual filtering to commence some 12 months later.

The time frame allocates relatively little time for organisations protesting against the filter to mobile public support against the initiative. However, Labor took a policy of mandatory ISP-level filtering to the November 2007 election, and has had testing laboratory Enex Testlabs evaluating the effectiveness of the technology throughout last year.

The results of those tests were announced in December last year, at which point Conroy confirmed the Federal Government would push ahead with the initiative in the new year.

Inside opposition

Also in her blog post, Lundy noted with parliament resuming this year, she had been able to continue lobbying within the Labor party to introduce an opt-out option for adults who prefer their internet unfiltered.

“I believe that the best path forward is one of mandatory choice where as part of their normal interaction with an ISP all subscribers are provided information about filtering so they can make an informed choice (to filter or to not filter), and at that point we have a fantastic opportunity to provide further information and resources about general Internet safety best practices,” said Lundy.

“This option ought to be changeable at any point and re-asked at subsequent service renewals.”
Lundy noted she would not cross the floor if the legislation is introduced into parliament without the opt-out option.

“As a Labor Senator, I am bound by the Caucus decision unless a conscience vote applies under our Federal Labor Party rules,” she said, noting this meant she could work internally to try and convince her colleagues to follow a different path.

“For all the criticism this model attracts, I believe that it usually works quite well and has contributed to the achievements of the Labor Party in over century of participation in the Federal Parliament,” she said.

Delimiter


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

BrownieBoy (User):

"Labor took a policy of mandatory ISP-level filtering to the November 2007 election"

Ermmm... did it? I thought the proposed filtering was going to have an opt-out at that stage?

03 February 2010, 8:46 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (New user):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
Ermmm... did it?

No! There was a lot of promises about a NBN and every student with a government supplied notebook. You'd have to be particularly dim to believe any labour promises at the upcoming election?

Nice stand Sen Kate, pity its too little, too late.


03 February 2010, 10:46 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (User):

Quoting Raindog:
and every student with a government supplied notebook.


You fell victim to the media. Kevin Rudd and Labor NEVER said that they would supply laptops to students. The media said that and repeatedly played a clip of his speech out of context.

04 February 2010, 10:17 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (New user):

Quoting Tin:
You fell victim to the media. Kevin Rudd

I fell victim to nobody! thank-you very much. I knew these promises were impossible, improbable, impractical vote grabbing, and I voted accordingly.
I sure as hell did not vote to have a Wimax service which would be operating now scrapped if favour of the $30 million dollar (and counting) black hole that is Conroy's vaporware NBN.


Quoting Tin:
Kevin Rudd and Labor NEVER said that they would supply laptops to students.

Said, implied whatever, all of creepy Kev's pontification about toolbox of the 21st century had no intention other than to suggest a Rudd government would fully equip every secondary student. The waste that has ensued shows how hollow his promises really were.


Quoting Tin:
The media said and repeatedly played a clip of his speech out of context.

No Kevin said that, no Australian journo, even ones from the telegraph could come up with something as lame as "toolbox of the 21st century". No out of context about it.
Did the media also selectively omit a Labour promise to interfere with Internet content? I don't think so, that one was kept nice and quiet for post election manoeuvres.

Kev's it'll all be fine by 2050 rhetoric has been shown to be as lacking as his ability to do something with the present problems of 2007-2010.

End of the day those notebooks were a stupid idea and the few underpowered net-books that were realised were just another example of Rudd's expensive incompetence.


04 February 2010, 10:36 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ausman (New user):

On ya Kate. Kick Conroy in the goolies and give us choice over the filter as adults.

04 February 2010, 1:45 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

priceofnails (New user):

I think I love you. :)

No, not like tbat, before someone goes shutting down me commenting here, commenting here, or hey, just *here*. :p

This is sadly our only hope at the moment, lest we be damned somewhat now, and who knows how badly when there is a change of government, whenever that might be. Just imagine what Libs, not to mention ex-Libs ( like Pauline Hanson, but not that particular one any longer ;) ) will do if this "filter" is in place already...

Aided and abetted by FF and the rest, of course.

04 February 2010, 4:19 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

BrownieBoy (User):

Strangely enough, the relevant documents about Labor's 2007 promises have now disappeared from the ALP's web site. Google finds their internet filtering proposal at:

www.alp.org.au/download/now/labors_plan_for_cyber_safety.pdf

but the link now gives a "page not found" error. Google's cache doesn't have it either.

Digging around some blogs from that time, it seems that the document actually said the following:

"A Rudd Labor Government will require ISPs to offer a 'clean feed' internet service to all homes, schools and public internet points accessible by children, such as public libraries."

Okay, there's two key points here:

1) It requires ISPs to *offer* such a service. It does *not* say that it's mandatory for all subscribers to sign-up for it.

2) It's only required for "internet points accessible by children". I have no chlildren, so why does this apply to my home? And even if I had children, isn't it my business what they do or don't see, and not the Federal Goverment's?

The ALP has lied to the Australian electorate, as far as I can see. Their 2007 manifesto did *not* specify a mandatory filter for everybody, and this article is in error for saying that they did. Is Ms LeMay going to correct her article?

04 February 2010, 10:31 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (New user):

Quoting BrownieBoy:
but the link now gives a "page not found" error. Google's cache doesn't have it either.

This has become a recurrent theme, when even past weather records are now hidden from view.



Quoting BrownieBoy:
The ALP has lied to the Australian electorate, ...... Their 2007 manifesto did *not* specify a mandatory filter

And that's it in a nutshell non delivery on what was promised, and claims of a mandate for measures the electorate clearly does not want. Labour has spent 12 years of Howard/Costello surplus, guess what funds any future rounds of Kev's brand of bread & circuses?




04 February 2010, 11:17 AM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user