Page 2754 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 21 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I ask all members to note that reference: chapter 13. Having read that chapter, I believe that those who believe this Bill is merely a money Bill, a tax Bill, will think again. Look especially at the segment on the three main categories of video pornography of which so-called, improperly called, "non-violent erotica" is described in categories (II) and (III) on page 200. May I just pause for a moment on the question of non-violent erotica. That is really a euphemism for hard-core pornography. In any case, the accuracy of the term may be questioned because non-violent erotica could be works of art; it could be photographs; it could be prose or poetry. To take that term and misuse it in connection with what is hard-core pornography I think is quite improper and is an example of a propaganda industry rather than of an industry which is rightly describing what the case is.
Women in particular are seen in all these categories - I, II and III - as commodity victims of this material from the taxing of which this Bill would derive income. I would not wish to shock members or the staff of Hansard by quoting what is said in full; I commend the volumes to you. But I can quote from chapter 13, section 48, page 201.
The Committee ... also refers to this material as degrading in that it frequently 'depicts people, usually women, as existing solely for the sexual satisfaction of others, usually men, or that depicts people, usually women, in decidedly subordinate roles in their sexual relations with others, or that depicts people engaged in sexual practices that would to most people be considered humiliating'.
May I say, sir, that that particular paragraph is mild compared to the paragraphs in the report from the US Attorney-General or from other sections of that report. So I do not accept that we are here debating a money Bill. We are tonight reminding ourselves, as with the debate on the ACT as a national centre for a gambling casino, that we are a city on a hill, a city with a vision, a city that does not offer itself to anyone or to any industry merely to make money.
There is, therefore, certainly an ethical dimension in what we decide this evening. It may also be a precursor to a further debate about the possible restriction of this degrading industry to a few outlets in a hopefully remote industrial area of the city; such legislation lies ahead. I would add here parenthetically that I can see a case for some parts of category III pornography being available possibly through Christian bookshops. There are some areas of clinical pornography - if that is what you want to call it - which may fit under a reasonable category but most of it does not.
For the moment, then, we are refusing to accept Mr Hawke's reluctance to bite this nasty bullet. I refer to a letter
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .