Australian Internet Censorship Jan to Apr 2006

Internet censorship was back on the agenda in March 2006 with the release of the Labor Party Policy.

Media Statement - 21st March 2006

A Beazley Labor Government will give peace of mind to parents concerned about their kids' exposure to violent and pornographic material on the internet.

Under Labor, all Internet Service Providers will be required to offer a filtered "clean feed" internet service to all households, and to schools and other public internet points accessible by kids.

Labor's "clean feed" system would prevent users from accessing any content that has been identified as prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, including sites containing child pornography, acts of extreme violence or cruelty, and X-rated material.

Only Labor understands the concerns of parents who want their kids to access the internet without exposure to pornography and violence.

John Howard has had ten long years to address these concerns but instead he just defends a failing system of regulation which doesn't do enough, by advising parents to "do it themselves" with internet filter software.

The reality is that cost and poor computer literacy mean almost two-thirds of parents don't have internet filters on their family computers.

This is not good enough when research suggests that the exposure of children and others in the community to this sickening content can lead to aggression towards women and child abuse.

Under the current law prohibited content can be removed from the internet if it is based in Australia, but around 85 per cent of prohibited content, like child pornography, is located offshore.

Governments can and should do more to stop extreme Internet content from getting into Australian homes and being accessed by kids.

Through an opt-out system, adults who still want to view currently legal content would advise their ISP that they want to opt out of the "clean feed", and would then face the same regulations which currently apply.

Last year a Government report confirmed that the technology to implement mandatory filtering by ISPs is feasible and won't slow the internet down.

Leading telecommunications companies overseas like British Telecom and Telenor are already employing this technology.

Labor recognises the introduction of this filtering will impose costs on Internet Service Providers. We will work with industry to ensure this service is provided at no extra cost to the householder. We will ensure that the costs of providing a clean feed are shared fairly and competition is not adversely affected, particularly for small providers.

This proposal should be part of a multi-pronged attack on illegal content. Last year, Labor called for a subsidy for a family's purchase of internet filtering software - a good idea ignored by the Howard Government.

Labor would also look to put extra resources into the Net Alert program to promote internet safety for kids and parents and strengthen ties with international law enforcement to bring publishers of illegal content to justice.

An out of touch Howard Government's ignorance of kitchen table issues like these is letting Australian parents down.

The Labor Government I lead will give peace of mind to mums and dads when it comes to violent and pornographic images no child should see.

***

Steve Fielding
Family First Senator for Victoria
MEDIA RELEASE SF/45. 
Tuesday March 21, 2006 
STILL NO GOVERNMENT ACTION ON FAMILY FIRST’S CALL FOR BAN ON INTERNET PORNOGRAPHY 

For more than six months Family First has been calling on the Government to ban internet pornography. 

Family First has raised this issue with the Prime Minister’s office many times and is disappointed that we are still waiting for the Government to act. 

This is a huge community concern. As parents, we want a safe internet environment for our kids, and the way to do that is to ban internet pornography, while allowing adults who want it, to 'opt in' and access it.

Parents feel powerless. We know we have to let our kids roam the Internet for study. Yet we can’t be watching over their shoulders all the time to monitor what they are seeing. 

Last year, Family First sought technical advice about how a ban on internet pornography could work. We spoke to experts and discovered it was possible to block pornography at the Internet Service Provider (ISP) level.

As well as numerous meetings with the Prime Minister's Office, and the Prime Minister, urging him to adopt our policy, Family First has also met with Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan. 

Why is the Government taking so long to act? Either it agrees with our policy and will adopt it or it doesn't. We know action is possible. In May 2004 the Government published a report which revealed it would cost $45 million to establish a national system, and $33 million each year to operate.

***

Senator the Hon Helen Coonan
Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate.

Media Release
016/06
21 March 2006

Labor very late to the Internet filtering debate

Labor’s plans to force Internet Service Providers to filter the Internet will only result in slowing down the Internet for every Australian without effectively protecting children from inappropriate and offensive content, the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen Coonan, said today.

“It is astounding that Labor is only now considering cracking down on Internet porn when the ALP’s approach to date has been to do nothing,” Senator Coonan said.

“In contrast, the Government has been working since 1999 to legislate, regulate and also to educate parents, children and all Internet users about the issue of offensive and inappropriate content on the Internet.

“PC-based filtering remains the most effective way of protecting children from offensive Internet content, as well as other threats that are not addressed by Labor’s ISP-filtering proposals.

“PC-based filters are more effective at blocking all manner of offensive content, provide greater control to parents of the content their children are exposed to and do not affect the performance of the Internet for all users.

“Labor has continually tried to thwart the Government's attempts to appropriately regulate the Internet including amendments to close a loophole that potentially allowed people access to the most offensive content, including child pornography.

“This is content that has been deemed by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to be too offensive to classify and too offensive to be available to anyone, let alone children.

“All of these moves have been met with cries of ‘heavy-handed censorship’ from Labor. Now Labor realises that they are out of step with the Government and with community thinking on this important issue.”

According to research conducted by the Government’s Internet safety organisation NetAlert, the kind of server-based filtering proposed by Labor has been found to have a major adverse impact on network performance.

The NetAlert trial was conducted by researchers from RMIT as part of the Government-funded Launceston Broadband Program, in partnership with ACMA and with the assistance of Telstra. The final report will be released shortly but the preliminary findings of the trial include that:

“A previous Government review into the filtering technology that is the basis of Labor's plan also found that it would involve implementation costs of around $45 million and ongoing costs of more than $33 million per annum for ISPs for questionable benefit,” Senator Coonan said.

“Moreover, Kim Beazley’s flawed plans to protect families are not even supported by members of his own party.

“While Mr Beazley has suddenly put the Labor Party’s faith behind ISP-based filter technology, Labor has previously dismissed the plan as unworkable and one that would make the Internet slower and more expensive.

Then Shadow Spokesperson for IT, Senator Kate Lundy said it best when responding to the idea of ISP-level filtering in the Senate on March 19 2003:

“This ridiculous proposition is made even more absurd when the weaknesses of filtering technology at this level effectively ensure that it would not work anyway.”

The Government is serious about protecting families and ensuring that minimum community standards were upheld on the Internet and in new emerging media.

“The Government bans all X-rated and Restricted Classification (RC) material from being hosted in Australia and requires age verification controls on R-rated material,” Senator Coonan said.

“We have also established NetAlert - a $7 million initiative to help educate Australians about safe Internet surfing. During the last election the Government committed a further $2 million to NetAlert for an education and awareness raising campaign.

“Controlling and banning offensive content that originates from overseas is more difficult so the Government requires all ISP’s to supply filtering technology at or below cost to consumers.

“ACMA is currently undertaking a compliance audit of the top 20 ISPs covering 90 per cent of subscribers which is due to be completed shortly. If any ISP is found to have breached their obligations they can be issued with fines of up $27,500 per day.”

Recent research shows that the Government’s policies are having an impact.

NetAlert kidsonline@home study released in 2005 found that 35 per cent of families use software to filter inappropriate websites, an increase from 17 percent in 2001.

“The Government will continue to monitor the effectiveness of filters and I am actively considering options for how the Government might increase the uptake of PC-based filters,” Senator Coonan said.

“It is important that all Internet users can operate in an online world in a safe and secure way. I encourage all parents and other concerned users to visit the NetAlert website at www.netalert.com.au or to call the hotline on 1800 880 176 to find out more about safety and the Internet.”

***

Internet Industry Association
IIA Questions ALP Policy on Internet Filtering 
Tuesday, 21 March 2006

For Immediate Release

IIA Questions ALP Policy Position on Internet Filtering

The Internet Industry Association has questioned the rationale for the fundamental change to Australia's internet content regulatory scheme proposed by the ALP today.

"We are not convinced that Australian families will benefit from fundamentally changing a scheme which is internationally recognised as the most advanced of its kind in the world", said IIA chief executive Peter Coroneos.

Mr Coroneos added: "Under the government-backed Internet Content Code scheme which applies in Australia, ISPs are already required to provide their customers with access to a filter or filtered feed. Furthermore, these filters must pass rigorous independent testing to ensure they not only catch the kind of content referred to the in the Opposition's proposal, but also thousands of other sites which are likely to cause offence to adults and potential disturbance to children. On top of all this, the scheme prohibits ISPs from profiting from the provision of these filters - they must be offered on a cost recovery basis, and some ISPs even offer them for free."

Under Australia's Broadcasting Services Act, industry Codes of Practice are developed and enforced. The Codes apply to all ISPs in Australia who are required to adhere to the scheme, and substantial penalties exist for non-compliance. These penalties are enforceable in the Federal Court.

Mr Coroneos added: "It is important to recognise that the UK 'Cleanfeed' scheme (upon which the Labor proposals are modelled) was a market-drivien initiative which arose because the UK lacked the strong legislative protection available to Australians. We can't understand why we'd adopt measures that will impose significant extra costs on users, degrade network performance and deliver no real upside for Australian families beyond that currently available."

"For families and those concerned with child safety the message is simple," Mr Coroneos concluded. "Follow the advice given by your ISP and take advantage of the tools and services they provide to shield your children from unsuitable sites."

Ends

More information about the IIA Codes and family friendly filters is available at www.iia.net.au/guideuser.html. For details of Australia's co-regulatory scheme see www.acma.gov.au. For general information about protecting children online, see www.netalert.net.au.

For further information please contact: 
Peter Coroneos Chief Executive Internet Industry Association www.iia.net.au 
phone (02) 6232 6900

***

Beazley announces plan to block Internet porn. ABC Online 21.03.06

Mr Beazley says Australian parents do not want their children to be exposed to such material.

"Block it at the point of the provider as opposed to the point of the parent and if that particular household wants to opt into the pornographic sites then they make an active decision to do so," he said.

"Parents want their kids learning on the net, not exposed to pornography and violence.

"The reality is ... only about a third of the parents put some sort of blocker in relation to the sites on their home computers, it's too hard for most of them but if you did it at the level of the provider, probably very few people would opt in."

***

Porn plan not needed, says IIA. The Australian 21.03.06

LABOR'S proposal to block children's access to pornography and graphic violence online has been dismissed by the internet industry as unnecessary.

Internet Industry Association executive director Peter Coroneos said the current system in Australia was recognised as world-class.

In Australia, ISPs are covered by three codes of practice enforced by the ACMA.

Under the codes, anyone who subscribes to an ISP must be offered a filter program at low cost (some ISPs offer them for free), or provide a filtered service.

The filter programs enable the barring of a wider range of content than the clean feed process, Mr Coroneos said.

Any user can also report material to ACMA and if it is found to be hosted in Australia and banned, an ISP is ordered to take it down within 48 hours or face penalties.

If the content is illegal, but hosted overseas, it is referred to federal police and filter providers add it to the blocked list.

"No child in Australia need be exposed to harmful and offensive content," Mr Coroneos said.

"A family who takes advantage of these solutions will have a far greater degree of confidence in limiting the kind of material their children are likely to access than would occur if we adopt the limited clean feed model."

Mr Coroneos said the problem lay in educating parents and teachers about filter systems not putting in place mandatory systems, which could slow internet access and raise subscription prices.

***

Guy Barnett
Liberal Senator for Tasmania

Media Release
Barnett Urges Action To Ban Internet Porn And Violence
Wednesday, 22 March 2006

Senator Guy Barnett today urged the Australian Government to take whatever action was possible to protect children from internet pornography and violence.

“What can be done should be done to protect our children from internet porn and violence, whether it occurs in public places or the home. Recent surveys show that most parents support this action,” Senator Barnett said.

Late last year Senator Barnett authored a letter to the Prime Minister, co-signed by 62 of his Coalition colleagues, seeking national action on internet pornography and violence.

The letter proposed that internet pornography and violence be automatically banned in both the home and public places. Where an adult wished to have access to this material they would have to apply to an appropriate internet server provider for access.

(For a copy of Senator Barnett’s speech to the Senate last year on internet porn and violence click on Speeches on this website www.guybarnett.com)

***

Labor moves to block internet porn and violence . The Age 22.03.06

Internet Industry Association chief executive Peter Coroneos said the cost would be enormous and would have to be passed on if the plan was implemented. He said Australia already had the best filter systems in the world and more parents should be educated about availability rather than changing the entire scheme.

"We admire Labor's initiative but we just think it has come too late and is inferior to what we have," he said. "We have filters that not only block material that is banned by ACMA but tens of thousands of other sites that ACMA does not know about, including international websites related to gambling or containing racist material.

***

Porn plan panned. The Australian 22.03.06

READERS don't like the idea of filtering at the ISP level and haven't been shy in saying so. Read your say.

***

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION THE HON KIM C BEAZLEY MP

TRANSCRIPT OF DOORSTOP INTERVIEW , LAUNCH OF CRAIG EMERSON’S BOOK, Vital Signs, Vibrant Society, GLEBE, SYDNEY, 23 MARCH 2006

On another issue running around. Apparently Senator Coonan’s response to our demand that Australian kids get a clean feed and use the internet for educational purposes, not for accessing pornography - they intend to change. Well, can I congratulate Senator Coonan in the spirit of the diving competition at the Commonwealth Games for a neatly executed double back-flip with pike? Now, all Senator Coonan needs to do is enter the water. Enter the water and pick up Labor’s policy. We have a big stamp on Labor’s policy to give our kids a clean feed to ensure that the internet is of total value to them. And that is a stamp that says steal it. We invite the Government to steal it and implement it now. Don’t wait for 18 months for the election of a Labor Government, implement that policy now. And there is the question of the Wheat Board. It’s all over for the Government.

***

Steve Fielding
Family First Senator for Victoria
MEDIA RELEASE SF/46. 
Thursday March 23, 2006 
GOVERNMENT FLIP-FLOP ON INTERNET PORNOGRAPHY BAN

Family First welcomes Senator Coonan’s apparent change of heart about a ban on internet pornography and calls on the Government to immediately adopt Family First’s policy to protect our children. 

Family First has been lobbying the Prime Minister and Communications Minister Helen Coonan on this issue for more than six months. And we congratulate Kim Beazley for his announcement this week that Labor would follow Family First’s lead. 

Senator Coonan initially dismissed Family First’s and Labor’s calls for action but now appears to have had a change of heart.

Senator Coonan’s office is now reportedly saying the Government “has not ruled out ISP (Internet Service Provider)-based filtering”. 

The Government does not seem to understand this is a huge community concern. 

As parents, we want a safe internet environment for our kids but feel powerless about internet pornography. We know we have to let our kids roam the Internet for study, yet we can’t be watching over their shoulders all the time.

 If the Government is genuine about strengthening families and protecting children, it must immediately adopt Family First’s policy.

***

Coonan flips on net porn barrier. SMH 23.03.06

A NATIONAL blockade against internet pornography and violence is now a possibility after the Communications Minister, Helen Coonan, showed signs of buckling to backbench demands for action on this issue.

A day after scoffing at a Labor plan to force internet service providers to filter out porn and violence, Senator Coonan yesterday changed tack and said the Government had not ruled out such a filtering system.

This followed a demand from a Liberal backbench campaigner on the issue, Guy Barnett, who described current home-based measures as "unsatisfactory" and rejected Senator Coonan's earlier suggestions that mandatory filters would be costly and of "questionable benefit".

Senator Coonan's spokeswoman said "the Government has not ruled out ISP-based filtering and is currently undertaking a trial in Tasmania in conjunction with the internet safety agency NetAlert".

***

Internet Industry Association
Guide For Internet Users 
Thursday, 23 March 2006

The Internet Industry Association (IIA) has prepared a guide to assist Australian Internet users understand Australia's co-regulatory framework for online content.

***

Net filters lose battle in the end. The Age 26.03.06

You can't make internet filters mandatory. For a start, they don't work. By Mark Pesce.

Only by constant tightening can any filter keep pace with efforts to break through it. And so every filter grows more and more restrictive, until hardly anything makes its way through. This creates the kind of situation where a woman looking for information on, say, breast cancer can't get to a website because the filter is blocking the word breast as obscene.

Since this has become a political issue, with Labor and Liberal politicians trying to outflank each other in their zeal to protect Australia's children, it's appropriate to float a compromise: offer filtering, but make it optional. Parents who want to provide a filtered internet for their children can have it, while the rest of us can continue to enjoy the freedom to explore and expand our lives online.

***

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Internet Safety Question Senator CONROY (2.54 p.m.)—My question is to Senator Coonan, the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. Can the minister confirm that the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA, has identified more than 2,000 overseas websites containing prohibited internet content, including disturbing images of child pornography and sexual violence? Does the minister maintain her claim that Labor’s plan to require ISPs to filter out pornographic content for households, schools and libraries would cost around $30 million per year? Given that the government is sitting on a surplus in excess of $14 billion, can the minister explain to Australian parents why she thinks $30 million is too much to pay to block access to websites identified by ACMA as containing prohibited content?

Answer Senator COONAN—I thank Senator Conroy for the question. The government takes the view, quite frankly, that it is not the expense of a potential solution to this problem that is the barrier. If in fact we could be certain that the kind of proposal that Labor has put up would actually deliver a better outcome, that would be something that the government would seriously consider. We have not rejected the possibility of having ISP server level filtering. We have in fact looked at it three times. On each occasion, it has not been found to be effective. The point about it is that, before you would impose mandatory filtering on ISPs, some of whom are very small businesses, you would want to be absolutely certain that it would be effective. The point about it is that the government is very serious about protecting families from offensive content. The issue is not so much where you filter but making sure that the filtering that you do do is as effective as you can get it. This government is prepared to do whatever it takes to protect Australian children from inappropriate internet content.

As most in the chamber would be aware, the government has a comprehensive three-pronged strategy for protecting children on the internet. That is made up of three things: legislation, regulation and of course education of parents and of children. PC based filtering does remain, in our view, the most effective technical solution for blocking unwanted content. However, the government would never completely rule out ISP level filtering, and we will continue to look at it because, as technology changes, some of the real difficulties that currently accompany ISP level filtering may in fact be better addressed. We continue to review this technology, but I say to the Senate and indeed to Senator Conroy that ISP level filtering remains an inadequate solution that misses content, does not block all kinds of content available over the internet and of course is unable to be properly adapted. For instance, what might be suitable for a 17-year-old is certainly not suitable for a five-year-old, and there is no way with ISP filtering to be able to tailor-make the kind of internet experience that people wish to have.

While I understand industry’s concerns about the impact on internet performance and costs, I stress again that this is not the issue. The issue is what is most effective and not where the content is blocked. As I understand Mr Beazley’s statements about filtering, which he continues to make about every six months or so—he talks about it as some new policy position—they seems to be based on the Cleanfeed system in use on a very small and controlled list of child porn sites in the United Kingdom. It does not remove all adult content or even make the internet child-safe.

As I have said, the government has looked at alternative ISP level filtering technology three times—first of all in 1999 and most recently in a NetAlert trial in Launceston. The final report of this research will be released very shortly but the initial findings demonstrate that even the best-performing filter in the trial missed a quarter of the content on a small pre-prepared list of sites and all server-level filters tested had a major impact on network performance, with the performance degrading even more on faster connections. The government is of the view that, until the technology improves, PC based filters remain the most effective. (Time expired)

Question Senator CONROY—Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Has the minister seen comments by her Liberal Party colleague Senator Barnett that the cost of a mandatory filtering scheme could be seen as a small price to pay to protect our children? Is she also aware of that he has said ‘there is a broad view within the coalition that as a government we should do all that can be done to protect our children’? Can the minister explain why she has failed to do all that she can to stop sickening internet content from entering Australian homes? Does the minister believe that her lack of action is supported by her coalition colleagues?

Answer Senator COONAN—I do not know whether Senator Conroy was listening, because it seems that most of the points that Senator Joyce was talking about are things that the government has under very serious consideration. Obviously, Labor has no idea as to the efficacy of filtering at network level. We know that Labor have been caught out and are on the back foot over this issue. We know that they ridiculed the government’s proposals a couple of years ago to do PC based filtering. Labor attacked ISP based filtering. Even Senator Conroy acknowledged only last week that this system would not block everything and that there would still be ways around it. We have to find a sensible solution that protects our children, educates our parents and gives the very best outcome the technology can deliver. And Labor’s solution does not do that.

***

Petition: Information Technology: Internet Content
Date: 27 March, 2006 
Database: Senate Hansard
Presenter Senator Fielding 
Page: 14
Proof: Yes 
Source: Senate
Type: Petition 
Context: Petitions
Size: 3Kb

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled

We, the undersigned citizens of Australia draw to the attention of the Senate the common incidence of children being exposed to Internet websites portraying explicit sexual images. These images may involve children/teens, sexual violence, bestiality, and other disturbing material. Many such websites use aggressive, deceptive or intrusive techniques to induce viewing. We submit to the Senate that:

Exposure to pornography is a form of sexual assault against children and should be considered, like all sexual abuse of children, as a serious matter causing lasting harm. It is not adequate to charge individual parents with the chief responsibility for protecting their children from Internet pornographers determined to promote their product, OR to expect parents to teach children to cope with the damaging effects of pornographic images AFTER exposure. It is the primary duty of community and Government to prevent children being exposed to pornography in the first place by placing restrictions on pornographers and those businesses distributing such material. Internet Service Providers (ISPs), should accept responsibility for protecting children from Internet pornography, including liability for harm caused to children by inadequate efforts to protect minors from exposure. Your petitioners therefore, pray that the Senate take legislative action to restrict children’s exposure to Internet pornography. We support the introduction of mandatory filtering of pornographic content by ISPs and age verification technology to restrict minor’s access.

by Senator Fielding (from 123 citizens).

***

Policy needed on podcasting. The Australian 28.03.06

The federal Government's Digital Content Industry Action Agenda Report, launched earlier this month by Informatiomn Technology Minister Senator Helen Coonan, had little to say about podcasting or internet broadcasting.

Although it makes a brief reference to moving away from control of market structures and efficiencies of scale, and having new market entrants, there is nothing specific to wireless broadcasting.

There appear to be no regulations preventing anyone from transmitting television content to wireless devices, although we do have regulations that restrict access to traditional broadcasting spectrum.

The ACS has always supported a technology-neutral policy that applies the same regulations, regardless of the type of bandwidth used.

The Government's digital broadcasting strategy has been widely criticised for blocking innovation, but its light touch with the internet has worked reasonably well.

The ACS, which contributed policy advice on the internet, web censorship and spam, expects podcasting will also benefit from limited regulation.

***

Senator the Hon Helen Coonan
Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate.

Media Release
021/06
28 March 2006

Serious Concerns over .XXX

The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen Coonan today raised serious concerns about plans by the international Internet domain name body - ICANN - to establish a new adult content domain - .xxx.

The .xxx domain would provide dedicated Internet addresses for adult content sites currently spread throughout the .com and other domains.

“This Government takes a strong stand on Internet pornography and we would not support any measure which could lead to an increase in offensive content on the Internet,” Senator Coonan said.

“The Australian Government would be concerned by the creation of an Internet domain specifically for material which is largely illegal under Australian online content laws.”

Representatives from the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts have put this view directly to the ICANN board through the Government Advisory Committee meeting this week in Wellington, New Zealand.

Potential benefits that have been discussed for the establishment of the .xxx top level domain, including containing adult content to one domain on the Internet, remain vague and ill-defined.

Other reasons put forward by the supporters of this domain, such as using proceeds to fund filter technology development and child protection initiatives, have not been fully explained.

“I am yet to be convinced that there are any real benefits from the creation of this domain that would outweigh the risk of legitimising this offensive material,” Senator Coonan said.

“At this stage the idea that all offensive websites on the Internet would voluntarily quarantine themselves to a new domain is difficult to believe.”

Australia has asked ICANN to delay its decision on .xxx until it has provided better evidence of its purported benefits.

“If it becomes clear that this domain will simply increase the number of pornographic sites on the Internet and do nothing to protect Australian families from offensive content, then I will not hesitate to register Australia’s strong opposition to the establishment of .xxx,” Senator Coonan said.

***

Australia wants .xxx domain on hold. SMH 28.03.06

Icann president, Paul Twomey, said it was not the role of Icann to evaluate the content of a domain name.

"We run an open process for domain name applications and this .xxx application has been flagged since 2004 and has been open for governments to make comment since then," he said.

According to Mr Twomey, the only public policy advice now being considered would come from the GAC on Thursday, within which Australia had senior representation.

"After the receipt of such advice the board shall decide the next steps to take," he said.

***

Pressure builds for censorship. The Australian 28.03.06

THE federal Government is planning to bolster NetAlert, its online safety agency, and give the media regulator greater powers as pressure builds from Labor and its own backbench to curb online pornography.

Communications and IT Minister Helen Coonan says, however, that calls from Labor and Coalition colleagues to force internet service providers to filter porn sites are misguided. At its best, mandatory filtering by internet service providers was an expensive and ineffective way to limit children's access to online pornography, Senator Coonan told The Australian.

At its worst, mandatory ISP filtering was ineffective and seriously degraded the internet's performance, she said.

"I don't believe this is about money," Senator Coonan said. "You can do something if the issue is money.

"If we thought installing ISP filtering would solve the problem, I don't think money would be an issue.

"The issue is that it's demonstrably not effective."

Opposition IT spokesman Stephen Conroy said Government research showed the blacklist ISP filtering system that Labor had proposed would have had minimal impact on network performance.

"In 2004, the Government received independent advice that ISP filtering to remove blacklisted sites would take just 10 milliseconds and that this delay is generally not noticeable to the user," Senator Conroy said.

"The Government should stop making excuses and do all in its power to prevent children from being exposed to prohibited internet content."

***

Guy Barnett
Liberal Senator for Tasmania

Media Release
Tackling Internet Porn and Extreme Violence 
Wednesday, 12 April 2006

‘Every Australian has a fundamental right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence’

Senator Guy Barnett today revealed how he has secured offers from two companies based in the United States and Sydney to trial free of charge the removal of internet pornography and extreme violence across Tasmania for three months.

The trial is the first of its kind in Australia and if proven could become the forerunner to operate across Australia. The two companies, in Launceston today for the announcement are rulespace based in Beaverton, Oregon, and Sydney based company Internet Sheriff Technology.

“The filtering proposal would allow adult internet users to opt-out to have access to internet pornography if they wished. However, my objective will always be that every Australian has a fundamental right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence,” Senator Barnett said.

Senator Barnett said a survey of public libraries in NSW, Victoria and the ACT released last month and undertaken by the Australian Family Association found that 77% did not have any filtering.

In 2003 a survey by the Australia Institute called Regulating Youth Access to Pornography found that 84% of boys and 60% of girls had been accidentally exposed to pornographic material on the internet, while two in every five boys had deliberately used the internet at some stage to see sexually explicit material.

“The survey found that 93% of parents were in favour of filtering out pornography available on the home computer, let alone those in public buildings. The survey also drew a link between prolonged exposure to this material and tolerance of sexual aggression,” Senator Barnett said.

He said he expected the trial to start mid year and would liaise with the Minister for Communications’ office regarding the outcomes of the trial.

In November last year Senator Barnett authored a letter to the Prime Minister on internet pornography and extreme violence, and was supported with the signatures of more than 60 of his Coalition colleagues.

***

MEDIA STATEMENT 
Senator Stephen Conroy 
Deputy Opposition Leader in the Senate Shadow 
Minister for Communications and Information Technology 
12 April 2006 

Coonan out of touch on porn filtering 

Labor welcomes the announcement that two Internet Service Providers in Tasmania will soon begin trialling a service which filters out pornographic and violent material. 

The trial comes just weeks after the Minister, Senator Coonan dismissed Labor's plan to require ISP filtering as too expensive and claimed that it would slow down the internet. 

International experience from Britain, Norway and Sweden demonstrates that ISP filtering is feasible and can be provided at no extra cost to the consumer. 

It is two years since the Government received advice from an independent expert that the kind of ISP filtering advocated by Labor would cause a delay of only 10 milliseconds and would not generally be noticeable by the end user.

 For too long Senator Coonan has made excuses for her failure to act. 

She continues to blame parents and says that they should purchase filters for their computers. 

The Minister ignores the reality that for reasons of cost and or computer literacy, two-thirds of households do not use these filters. 

The Government's flawed regime leaves children in these households completely exposed to disturbing internet content. 

Labor is concerned that after the trial is finished families will be asked to pay for the filtered service. 

Labor believes that all Australian families are entitled to a clean internet feed at no extra cost. 

62 members of the Government's backbench support Labor's policy of mandatory ISP filtering. Senator Coonan's failure to act on this important issue shows that she is out of touch, not only with the concerns of Australian families, but also with her coalition colleagues. 

Further information: Stephen Conroy on 0418 383 965 or Mark Tapley 0418 420 065 

Wednesday, 12 April 2006

***

Parents log on to trial internet pornography ban. The Age 12.04.06

Communications Minister Helen Coonan was wary about the impact such a move could have on internet processing speeds and the effectiveness of filters.

Yet momentum is building for a major policy shift. A senior Government source confirmed last night that federal funds could be committed to extend the service nationally at no cost to every household.

Such a move could cost millions of dollars. A Government review of mandatory ISP filtering in 2004 concluded setting up a national filtering scheme would cost $45 million, plus maintenance charges of $33 million a year.

Senator Barnett said further lobbying for nationwide filtering was likely to occur if the Tasmanian trial proved a success as expected.

"The key objective will be to ensure every Australian has a right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence," he said.

Internet Sheriff Technology sales director Glen Phillips, whose company filters internet services for all public school children in NSW, said the filter could differentiate between health or anatomical information and porn.

Parents or guardians were able to put such content on a "white list" of material they did want their children to be able to access.

"The problem with a disk (filter) is that it is easier to get around," he said. "With ours, you can turn the service on and off, but it is logged so if a child turned it off, the parent would be notified."

***

Telstra, Optus wait on filters. The Australian 12.04.06

AUSTRALIA'S two largest internet service providers have yet to commit to the Tasmania-wide trial of porn filtering technology being championed by Liberal backbencher Senator Guy Barnett.

Internet Sheriff and Rulespace were still negotiating with the two largest providers - Telstra and Optus - to get them involved in the trial.

"In perfect what we would love to see is right at the top end of the pipe with the likes of Verizon and Telstra and Optus', however that won't stop the trial," Internet Sheriff sales director Glen Phillips said.

"There will still be a trial for half of Tasmania which is far better than no trial at all."

Mr Phillips said that negotiations between the trial's organisers and Telstra were at an advanced stage.

"We're negotiating with guys from Telstra at the moment and of course they've got some management structure changes of late so we're speaking to them and we're quite confident that we're going to get them onboard as well," he said.

Mr Phillips said his company's filtering software - which was developed in Australia - did not have any impact on the speed of internet services.

The trial of both public and private internet usage was the first of its kind in Australia, and if it proved useful could become the forerunner to a filtering system operating nationwide by the end of the year, Senator Barnett said.

If the trial was successful and ISP filtering adopted nationally, the scheme would add about $2.50 per month to the cost of providing an end-user internet connection. Senator Barnett said he wanted government to foot the bill for the increase.

At $2.50 per user per month, a national scheme covering more than two million computers users would cost more than $60 million annually.

But Senator Bartnett, and others like Family First Senator Steve Fielding, was not satisfied enough was being done.

"The (Tasmanian) filtering proposal would allow adult internet users to opt-out to have access to internet pornography if they wished," Senator Barnett said.

"However, my objective will always be that every Australian has a fundamental right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence."

Mr Phillips said filtering would combine a site black-list maintained by the Internet Industry Association and heuristic software that could check content coming from unknown web locations.

It was easy for porn site operators to circumvent filter lists, he said.

"Lists by themselves are always flawed because adult content providers switch their (addresses) every day," Mr Phillips said.

The filter service parents could be used to block all adult sites or run in a softer "coaching" mode aimed at households with adolescent teens, Mr Phillips said. The coaching mode allows them to visit adult sites but warns them that their activity will be reported to their parents, he said.

A recent study by the CSIRO showed that Internet Sheriff's software incorrectly blocked sites in around 5 per cent of cases.

Mr Phillips said he wasn't sure which classification standards the software maker applied to develop the filtering system.

Senator Barnett would meet with staff from the Department of Communications, IT and the Arts, as well as staff from Helen Coonan's office tomorrow to discuss how to quantify the effectiveness of the ISP filtering, and how to measure its impact on network performance.

Opposition communications spokesman Stephen Conroy welcomed the Tasmanian trial, which he said would back Labor's assertion that a filtered, "clean feed" service could be delivered to Australian homes without degrading internet performance.

Labor pledged last month that if it is elected it will enforce mandatory ISP filtering to clean up the internet.

"(Senator Coonan) continues to blame parents and say that they should purchase filters for their computers," he said.

"The Minister ignores the reality that for reasons of cost and/or computer literacy, two-thirds of households do not use these filters."

The government's flawed regime leaves children in these households completely exposed to disturbing internet content.''

Senator Conroy said he was concerned that families will be asked to pay for the filtered service once the trial is complete.

***

Liberal Senator Guy Barnett is keeping up the pressure for increased censorship of the internet. Back in November 2005 he was saying that Adult choices would be restricted:

"...with some managed exemptions for adult users."
Ban Access To Porn And Extreme Violence On Internet
Wednesday, 9 November 2005

In December he claimed that Adults would have:

"..... unrestricted access if they wish."
Keeping kids from nasties on the net. The Age 8.12.05

In his latest media release he is sticking to this line. Do you believe him?

"The filtering proposal is not intended as a blanket prohibition on access by adults to internet pornography or extreme violence. The filtering would allow adult internet users to opt-in to have access to this medium if they wished."
Families Urged To Lobby Telstra and Optus Over Internet Porn Trial
Wednesday, 19 April 2006

***

Guy Barnett
Liberal Senator for Tasmania

Media Release
Families Urged To Lobby Telstra and Optus Over Internet Porn Trial
Wednesday, 19 April 2006

‘Every Australian has a fundamental right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence’ 

Senator Guy Barnett today urged Tasmanian customers of Telstra and Optus who support the trial of internet pornography filtering to lobby the telcos to take party in the mid-year trial. 

“I am disappointed that these two giant Internet Service Providers appear to be snubbing their noses at a trial being offered at no cost to either them or their customers,” Senator Barnett said. 

“I call on Telstra and Optus to be good corporate citizens. I urge them to recognise the extent and depth of their duty of care as internet providers and take part in the trial. 

Senator Barnett said he would write to both telcos, asking them to reconsider their current decision not participate in the trial. 

“In the United States 80% of ISPs provide internet filtering for free. If Telstra and Optus are so convinced that current safeguards are adequate and therefore they are so sure that a trial would show this to be the case, they would surely have no problems with an ISP-based trial offered free of charge,” he said. 

“They may say that the current safeguards are okay, but the community is saying to me the current safeguards are not okay. I urge all Tasmanian internet customers of Telstra and Optus to email or write to them and request that they participate in the trial. 

“All of these customers have a fundamental right to access the internet free from pornography and extreme violence, and it is the duty of the internet provider to constantly explore ways of updating this level of service and protection,” he said. 

Last week Senator Barnett revealed how he has secured offers from two companies based in the United States and Sydney to trial free of charge the removal of internet pornography and extreme violence across Tasmania for three months. 

The trial is the first of its kind in Australia and if proven could become the forerunner to operate across Australia. The two companies are rulespace based in Beaverton, Oregon, and Sydney based company Internet Sheriff Technology. 

The filtering companies say they have the agreement of a number of ISPs who would be involved in a Tasmanian trial. Telstra and Optus constitute the remainder of ISPs

The filtering proposal is not intended as a blanket prohibition on access by adults to internet pornography or extreme violence. The filtering would allow adult internet users to opt-in to have access to this medium if they wished.

“The objective in the first instance is to protect children, before we consider the rights of adults,” Senator Barnett said.

Continue to May 2006

   http://www.refused-classification.com

refusedclassification@gmail.com