Page 1410 - Week 05 - Thursday, 13 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I understand that the operation of this Bill is such that we will not see any films presently classified by the Commonwealth censorship bodies being classified as MA, but from this point on any new films that come forward for classification will receive an MA classification if that is what the appropriate authorities consider to be necessary. I understand that the films we might expect to be in that category, for example, are movies like The Silence of the Lambs, Fatal Attraction and Terminator 2.
Ms Follett: Was it any good?
MR HUMPHRIES: It is a very good movie, Chief Minister. I can say to you that if it attracted me it certainly will attract young people between the ages of 10 or so and 14. In fact, we can guarantee that that will be the case, particularly if the accompanying Bill here, the Publications Control (Amendment) Bill, is carried and there will be restrictions on the capacity of children to get those movies out of the local video shop when two or three or four months, or whatever the period is these days, has elapsed after it has been released in the cinema. There will be very much pressure on cinema operators in this town to be stopping a flood of young people wanting to come and see these very popular movies. My fear is that there is not really the mechanism there to allow cinema operators to make sure that they do not admit those young people. What is to stop, under the present arrangement proposed in this Bill, 14-year-old Johnny getting his older brother, who looks 19 - maybe he is not 19, but he looks 19 - to walk into the cinema with him and say, "I am acting as guardian for this young boy"?
That raises another matter of some concern in this legislation. The Bill refers to a parent or guardian accompanying a person in that prescribed age group being necessary to admit that child to the film. Madam Speaker, there is some confusion out in the cinema-owning community about what "guardian" actually means. "Guardian", it has been assumed by some, would mean the person who is in charge of that child for the purposes of the particular outing whereby they are going to the cinema. I must say that my view would be that a guardian under this legislation would be interpreted to mean the guardian who is legally appointed in place of a parent for the long-term welfare of the child. I invite the Minister to clear this matter up and to indicate that it does in fact mean a person who, as it were, stands responsible for the child in the course of that particular afternoon or evening when they are going to the cinema, but I would be very surprised if in fact that is what it means. I suspect that it means a legal guardian.
It then throws again onto the operator of the cinema the responsibility of ensuring that they can distinguish between the 19-year-old older brother or the friend who is taking the child to the cinema, because he cannot get in otherwise, and a real parent or legally appointed guardian, a guardian appointed by a court, presumably the Supreme Court, to stand in place of a parent. That is a matter of some confusion. I understand that the Greater Union cinema chain is proposing that in cases of doubt they have legal documents available in the cinema for a person to sign to say that they are indeed a particular age, whether it is 18 for an R-rated film or 15 for an MA film. But, Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, I think that the question needs to be asked whether that is a very appropriate way of dealing with this problem, and whether it is not incumbent on us who are making these laws to give a clearer indication to those who are going to be affected by them as to how they should deal with them. I certainly would not like
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .