Page 3400 - Week 08 - Thursday, 23 August 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
premises without a warrant to investigate potential breaches and will be able to seize any computer games that do not comply with the law. ORS receives recurrent funding, $121,000 in this year’s budget, to undertake the new enforcement function.
As I have previously noted, the bill engages section 11(2) of the Human Rights Act which provides that every child has the right to the protection needed by the child because of being a child without distinction or discrimination of any kind. The introduction of the R18+ classification category engages this right in a very positive sense as it will provide greater and more effective protections of children and vulnerable adults than the present scheme. As I have already noted, under the present scheme any person can purchase material from overseas and have no guidance as to its content.
The ACT has long supported the introduction of an R18+ category for computer games because it provides the community with a greater ability to control the distribution of these games and provides adult purchasers with greater information to allow them to determine whether a given computer game is something they truly want to view or use. As I have indicated, the ACT is pleased to be one of the leading jurisdictions in the implementation of this important reform.
I turn to the issue raised by Mrs Dunne about whether violent video games cause aggressive or violent behaviour. Firstly, there is no proven link between violence and computer games. However, the government has established that in the absence of an R18+ classification for computer games, people are downloading or purchasing unrated games from overseas, with no understanding of the content or level of impact of these games. The real risk is that the absence of a classification framework will allow these games to be accessed by children. The R18+ classification category will inform parents and protect children from exposure to inappropriate and offensive material.
Between May and September 2010 the commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department undertook a review of research exploring the link between violent video games and human aggression. All studies cited in group submissions to the 2009 discussion paper “Should the national classification scheme include an R18+ classification category for computer games?” were reviewed. The literature review found that much of the research into the behavioural impacts of playing computer games is contested and inconclusive. Although a significant amount of research shows a small to moderate link between video and games and aggression, there are problems with these findings that reduce their policy relevance. This includes defining and measuring violent content in games; accounting for third variables such as pre-existing aggressive personality, socioeconomic status and family peer influences; the severity of violent content, that is, is the content cartoonish versus realistic; the impact of socially acceptable violence, such as sports, or antisocial violence and problems with the concept of aggression used in research.
But this really does highlight that this is a complex area and that the most effective approach is through the regulation of the material to ensure that harm is minimised and that adults are able to view material consistent with the existing principles that underpin the classifications of all other materials, print and electronic, that exist
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video