Tony Smith must be a little miffed that shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey took it on himself to announce Coalition policy on the internet filter. In a few short sentences, Mr Hockey killed the proposal. telling the Triple J current affairs program Hack that the opposition would oppose the policy, that it was bad policy, and that it would instead revert to the Howard Government policy of giving away filter software to end-users for free. And that we would hear more about the policy soon.
As shadow communications spokesman, Tony Smith might have preferred to unveil such a strategically important election policy himself, and been given the chance to put the policy into some kind of context. And God help Mr Smith if the policy was not already generally known among the Coalition front bench and back bench. Because if the shadow Treasurer let slip the plan to oppose the filter before colleagues like Guy Barnett or Cory Bernardi – among others – had been fully briefed, there would have been hell to pay (and it would be Tony Smith paying it.) So the mandatory filtering plan is virtually dead. And in its place is a voluntary filtering mechanism that will cover the vast majority of internet users in Australia.
Because regardless of what kind of instant hero Tony Smith might have become today among opponents of the filter – it was an idea that held considerable support on both sides of politics. And among Liberals and Nationals, there were strong voices on both sides of the debate – many in favour of siding with the Government on mandatory filtering, and many opposed.
In a statement released this afternoon, Mr Smith confirmed Mr Hockey’s statement and said the Coalition would oppose the filter and would put forward a policy of issuing end-user filters instead. "The Coalition did not implement a mandatory ISP level filter when we were last in Government because it was not workable or effective, and offered parents a false sense of security," Mr Smith said, "A Coalition Government will not introduce a mandatory ISP level filter – we will instead implement practical and effective measures to enhance online safety and security including PC-based filters for families," he said. "Labor's plan is flawed and will not work, and we will have a different and better approach." Any scheme that attempts to balance freedom of speech with the need to protect young people from vile content is fraught with difficulty.
It is simply a difficult policy to design. Despite the narrow focus of the government's proposed filter, despite its technical feasibility and despite a series of transparency and accountability measures that were to be put in place, the filter simply unnerved people. And a great many simply said the filter would not work. But the Howard Government end-user filtering policy was a disaster (if you define disaster as a policy that costs millions but is nearly completely ineffective.
Under former Communications Minister Helen Coonan, government spend tens of millions of dollars on its end-user filter policy – including $15 million on an advertising/awareness campaign to make sure parents knew the filters were available. At its peak, about 30,000 people had taken up the government's offer of free filter software. 30,000! From an Australian subscriber base of 12 million or more! Further, despite the noisy opposition to the ISP-level filtering proposal, particularly from the technology sector, Mum’s and Dad’s were generally in favour in Government filtering the kind of content that the RC category is applied to. The fact that the opponents of mandatory filtering quietly accepted the volunteer ISP filtering by the nation’s three largest ISPs – which will block child abuse sites – is just strange.
Related articles
- Aussie opposition will scrap firewall (go.theregister.com)
