Page 3134 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 20 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Territories will examine the Commonwealth's legislation and will be free to adopt some of the provisions of the Bill and not others. So, although the legislation is considered to be model legislation that is presented as model legislation, States and Territories will still be able to make their own decisions regarding the various provisions of the legislation.
Madam Speaker, also legislation is currently being drafted with regard to a model enforcement Bill, which, at this stage, is being proposed to come into effect in 1995. This legislation follows the tabling of the Commonwealth's Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Bill 1994, which is currently before the Commonwealth Parliament. With regard to this legislation, a final draft of this Bill will be ready for the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General to examine in late October. States and Territories will also be able to adopt some provisions, and not others, of this legislation should they choose to do so, as is currently the case with regard to the Commonwealth's Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Bill 1994.
Madam Speaker, I think it is reasonable, on the basis of the information I have presented to the Assembly today about the work that is currently being done in this area, to ask the Attorney-General, Mr Connolly, whether he will keep the Assembly up to date with what is happening in the area, not only with regard to computer games but with regard to the issue of the classification of materials generally.
I would now like to comment specifically on several provisions in relation to this Bill. The first one concerns the classification categories identified for the classification of computer games. I am particularly interested in the G(8+) classification, which means material that is recommended for children older than eight years of age. The obvious question to ask is: Why have a newly created category of classification for computer games which is different from that for films and videos? Apparently, evidence was presented to the select committee of the Federal Parliament which examined this issue which indicates that at eight years of age children can differentiate fantasy from reality; hence, the reason for this classification.
I note, however, Madam Speaker, that according to a survey of several months ago many members of the community took little or no notice of existing classifications with regard to films and videos. It does seem unfortunate that, with feedback indicating that we have much to do to promote the existing classification system, we are creating an inconsistency, specifically in relation to computer games.
The second provision I would like to comment on specifically concerns the banning of R(18+) and X(18+) material, which I understand the ACT Government has supported but about which the Attorney-General has reservations. I share those reservations. The implication is that it is only children who play computer games and not adults. Further, inconsistencies exist between the treatment of X- and R-rated movies and videos and computer games. The Attorney-General has stated in his presentation speech that he will monitor the situation to try to ensure that X- and R-rated computer games are not available illegally. This will mean ongoing discussions with the Eros Foundation about the issue and responding to members of the community who contact the Attorney-General about anecdotal experiences of such material being available, which will then require specific investigation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .