Page 1009 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Lawrence, and some of the joys of not only that but also some of his other novels.
What I learnt was about the iniquitous nature of censorship, and censorship is really what we are talking about here. This amendment that has been proposed by Mr Stefaniak confuses the issue of non-violent erotica with violence. I believe it is a shame that this confusion is carried into debate. Our debate should be well above that.
I also believe that it is appropriate that we discuss X-rated movies and violent movies at another time. It is not really particularly relevant to how they are classified. This Bill is about how they are classified. So let us leave this sort of discussion to another time. With that in mind, I certainly oppose Mr Stefaniak's amendment.
MR HUMPHRIES (5.18): I think that the people who are opposing the amendment that Mr Stefaniak has moved have not really read it very carefully. The suggestion that there is some confusion between X-rated and excessively violent material simply cannot be sustained on the words of this amendment.
I refer members to the first item which says that X-rated and excessively violent film and video material is highly undesirable in the ACT. We make no bones about the fact that X-rated material does not, at present, include violent material. They are two separate categories; we accept that. We are saying in this amendment that both those matters should be dealt with, with a similar approach by government, and it should take firm measures to ensure that neither of those sorts of video material is available in the ACT. I will go on to discuss why that should be the case later.
The second part of that amendment refers to this material being degrading to women, which is clearly a reference to the X-rated part of the motion, and encouraging violent attitudes in young people, which is clearly a reference to the excessively violent videos and films. There are two issues here. We make no bones about the fact that there are two issues within the one motion, but we do not confuse the two. They are two issues we feel should be dealt with at the same time and in a similar manner.
Mr Speaker, I think that this amendment is highly timely. I want to draw to the attention of the Assembly the fact that this amendment arises out of the agreement, referred to by Dr Kinloch, in Darwin, I think, two years ago or thereabouts, on the classification of videos and films in Australia. That was a meeting of attorneys-general of all States and territories - at that stage, of course, the ACT was represented by the Federal Attorney-General - at which the issues were discussed. Agreement was reached between all of the attorneys-general - Labor and Liberal and National Party attorneys-general - on the question of classification of X-rated material. It was agreed
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .