Page 1409 - Week 05 - Thursday, 13 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
not know, or did not know until I spoke to them, anything about the new provisions, the new Bill, or did not know really very well how the new scheme would work, or were in some state of misunderstanding as to what the provisions actually did. I think that that situation is somewhat undesirable and is certainly unacceptable. I am a bit surprised that the Bill was not discussed, in the course of either the period before its introduction or the period subsequent to its adjournment in March or April, with those operators that are going to be affected. I would have thought it was fairly important. We are not talking about a vast class of people. We are talking about only a small handful of people upon whom this Bill impacts very heavily but against whom criminal penalties will apply in the event that they do not comply with the provisions.
The concerns are these, Madam Speaker. It is incumbent on a person who operates a cinema to ascertain whether a person falls in the MA classification or does not, and the break-in age for that, at this point, is 15 years - whether a person has attained the age of 15. The Attorney has pointed out, in the course of earlier debate or in the media in debate on this matter, that cinema operators already take steps to ascertain the age of people who come to their cinema seeking discounts because they are under the age of 18. In that sense, of course, they also need to ascertain whether a person is capable of being admitted to an R-rated movie and also need to know whether the person is 18. Although it is fairly common for a person of the age of 18 to carry identification with them, it is, I understand, extremely rare for a person of the age of 15 or 14, for that matter, to carry identification of his or her age. I am not sure what identification a person would carry that would be conclusive of a person's age. Obviously a birth certificate is conclusive, but I doubt whether many people leave home with birth certificates. Where they are accompanied by an adult you might expect that the adult might take some steps to ensure that there are provisions for that person to be suitably identified for getting into a cinema.
But there has been very little publicity about this legislation in the ACT, and I would hazard a guess that, if an MA film were shown tomorrow in the Territory and any parents arrived with their children in tow to see the movie, there would be very few indeed who would have on them a birth certificate for their child. There is also the problem that a birth certificate, as the Attorney has told us, is an inadequate method of proving a person's age, since I could obtain anybody's birth certificate, within reason, and front up to a cinema and say, "I am Michael Moore. I have a beard. I am Michael Moore". I am sure that people who would not be able to tell the difference between Michael Moore and me would admit me to the cinema. So a certificate is of somewhat unsatisfactory status to be resolving this matter.
I have asked some cinema operators what they intend to do to resolve this question. Those who understood what was entailed in the Bill - and there were not many - pointed out that they will have a parent or guardian there who can presumably speak for the child and who can satisfy the operator of the cinema that the person is entitled to be admitted to the movie. Madam Speaker, that assumes that the sorts of films we are talking about will not be the sorts of films that children between those ages of two and 14 will be very interested in getting into, and taking advantage of any loopholes that exist in the law to do just that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .