| 31.03.05 | IN A GLASS CAGE RC Confirmed. Hardcore Satellite TV. NZ/Aus Ratings. CALIGULA DVD. REDWOOD RC. LICK MY GUSHING PUSSY RC. NARC Game. Vic Classification Bill. 9 SONGS Previews. 2004 CAP Report. Two RC from '84. More |
| 04.03.05 | IN A GLASS CAGE Review. CONSTANTINE RB Report. Classification Bill in S.A. More |
| March 31st | The appeal by Siren to the Review Board regarding the RC rating awarded to IN A GLASS CAGE has failed. This reconfirms the ban that was first placed on the film back in 1995. The full news release can be found here. Siren's other banned title was THE GORE GORE GIRLS. This received an RC rating on February 23rd. Any request for a review must be received within 30 days. As yet there has been no news of any such application. We may have to assume that Siren are letting this one go. ****** ****** The following news release was issued by the New Zealand OFLC on March 21st.
The Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Arrangement is an agreement between the Australian and New Zealand governments to reduce barriers that restrict the sale of goods and movement of workers between the two countries. For example, if coffee percolators satisfy Australian regulatory requirements, they can be lawfully sold in New Zealand. Similarly, if lawyers meet New Zealand registration requirements, they can be registered as lawyers in other participating Australian jurisdictions. The two governments agreed that not all goods and services should be subject to the mutual recognition regime. The TTMRA contains three types of exemption: permanent, special and temporary. In the case of permanent exemptions, the two governments agreed that certain differing standards could not be aligned, and permanent exemption from the obligations of mutual recognition was seen as the best solution. “Pornographic material” and “classified publications, films and computer games” were given a permanent exemption from the TTMRA. The TTMRA is reviewed every five years. The Productivity Commission, an independent Australian government body, reviewed the TTMRA in 2003 at the request of the New Zealand Prime Minister and the nine Australian heads of government. As part of that review, the Productivity Commission had to recommend whether or not there were grounds to remove the permanent exemption for “pornographic material and classified publications, films and computer games” from the TTRMA. Removing the exemption would effectively mean that Australian film and computer game classifications and bans would apply in New Zealand, and that New Zealand restrictions and bans would apply in Australia. The Productivity Commission’s Report acknowledged that New Zealand recognises Australian ratings for unrestricted films, videos, DVDs and computer games. This is not reciprocal. Australia does not recognise New Zealand ratings for unrestricted material. The Commission also stated that Australia and New Zealand have “different approaches to the classification of restricted material.” The Productivity Commission received a number of submissions. The Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department opposed the mutual recognition of film classifications because “there are numerous examples of different classification decisions by the New Zealand and Australian bodies”. The Attorney-General’s Department also stated that “it would be unacceptable to Australian communities” if New Zealand classifications were recognised in Australia. The only submission reported as being in favour of the mutual recognition of classifications was from the Interactive Software Association of New Zealand. ISANZ submitted that The compliance requirement for New Zealand games which are mostly brought into Australia first for trans-shipment shipment into New Zealand includes the need to open each game place a New Zealand label on the inside of the cover and again on the outside of the cover before resealing in shrink wrap places a undue burden on suppliers. The concern expressed by ISANZ applies to approximately 65 titles classified R13, R16 and R18 that are marketed in New Zealand each year. The vast majority of computer games marketed in New Zealand are allowed to carry their unrestricted rating labels from Australia and all other foreign jurisdictions. This is an advantage not enjoyed by the film, video and DVD industries. The Productivity Commission has recommended that the TTMRA’s permanent exemption for “pornographic material and classified publications, films and computer games” should be retained on the grounds of “sovereignty and differences in approach between the two countries”. It is therefore unlikely that Australia will recognise New Zealand classifications of restricted material in the near future. It is equally unlikely that New Zealand will recognise Australian classifications of restricted material. Many would consider that issues of sovereignty, different community standards, differences in approach and the unilateral nature of New Zealand’s recognition of Australian ratings of unrestricted material would also justify a review of the New Zealand regime that cross-rates unrestricted films, videos and DVDs from Australian ratings. The New Zealand government has decided to commence such a review.1 As ever, the Classification Office would be interested in your views. 1. Report of the Government Administration Committee on the Films, Videos, and Publications Amendment Bill (91-2), presented to the House of Representatives on 30 August 2004, p.13.*** The submissions of the Queensland and Victorian Governments are listed below. Submission 96 Queensland Classification of Films Act 1991 and Classification of Publications Act 1991 The Queensland Government supports the continuation of the permanent exemptions of both Acts. This legislation deals with restrictions on indecent material. The current permanent exemption is viewed by the Queensland Government as being an effective means of ensuring appropriate standards are maintained in respect to indecent material. Submission 168 Preliminary Finding
7.4 Changes are needed, in the absence of harmonisation across jurisdictions, for implementation of a realistic national approach. Consideration could then be given to retaining or removing the permanent exemption for the MRA for pornographic material. Preliminary Finding 7.5 The TTMRA permanent exemption for pornographic material should be retained, pending any development in relation to the MRA exemption. The Victorian Department of Justice notes the finding in the draft report that the restrictions on the sale of pornographic material were ineffective and consideration should be given to a national approach, whether that means retaining or removing the permanent exemption which currently exists. In Australia, both the ACT and NT allow the sale of X-rated videos. In all other States, sale is banned but purchase of these videos is not. Therefore, those in Victoria may mail order X rated videos from ACT, NT or overseas. As the evaluation notes, the permanent exemption is therefore ineffective in achieving desired social outcomes as it does not control the viewing of X rated videos. The Victorian Department of Justice would support exploration of ways to make the mutual recognition regime more effective in relation to the sale of pornographic material.
The final decision is as follows. Productivity Commission Finding 7.5 On the grounds of sovereignty and differences in approach between the two countries, the TTMRA permanent exemption for pornographic material and classified publications, films and computer games should be retained. ****** A word of warning
to those of you thinking of picking up the new Australian Warner Vision
DVD of CALIGULA. This is definitely
one to miss as it contains a very heavily cut version of the film. REDWOOD and LICK
MY GUSHING PUSSY are two more titles to add to the ever expanding X18+ database Activists urge classification review. SMH 21.03.05 Another article covering the lack of an R18+ games rating. Dr Jeffrey Brand, an associate professor of communications and media at Queensland's Bond University, said Australia was the only Western country which did not allow adult classification of video games. Dr Brand said this was because Federal and State ministers responsible for classification believed the interactive aspect of video games made them more influential, a conclusion with which he disagreed. "I don't believe that there is evidence to support that view. My concern is that not having an R classification leads to a view that there aren't games out there that are explicitly for adult and mature audiences." In October last year, State Attorney-General Rob Hulls pushed for the introduction of uniform classification laws, but the move was not supported by the federal government. "As part of a national classification regime, the Federal Government needs to act to resolve a clear gap in the system whereby computer games, unlike films, are not subject to R18+ or X18+ ratings," Mr Hulls said. New game smacks of grim culture. The Age 21.03.05 Looks at the latest controversial game NARC. The previous article stated: The OFLC will not comment on Narc until it receives a request for its classification, expected later in the year. A spokesman for Sony defended the game, saying it was "a classic good-versus-evil game" that showed the destructive power of drugs.
******
Second reading Debate resumed from 24 February; motion of Mr HULLS (Attorney-General). Government amendments circulated by Mr HULLS (Attorney-General) pursuant to standing orders. Mr McINTOSH (Kew) -- This bill deals with a complex and convoluted piece of legislation -- that is, the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) (Enforcement) Act. This act has been amended from time to time to bring it into line with modern mores, but, most importantly, attempts have been made under the current legislation to adopt a more national approach to the classification of films and bring it into line with a national model that I understand has been agreed to by most, if not all, attorneys-general at federal and state levels. From recent information I understand Queensland and Western Australia are yet to sign off on it, although it is likely they will. It is only a matter of the ministers responsible for censorship in those two states signing off on it. In the case of Queensland the minister responsible is not the Attorney-General, and the Western Australian Attorney-General was unable to Page 34 participate as a result of the recent election in Western Australia. Firstly, the opposition accepts that the new classifications proposed by the Attorney-General are appropriate under the circumstances of the national model being adopted. Secondly, there will be substantial house amendments, and the Attorney-General advises me that they address one of the concerns that has been raised by the industry in relation to the Victorian government's attempt to bring the classification scheme into accord with the international covenant that prevents all forms of child exploitation by raising the minimum age of people appearing in or depicted in such offensive material from 16 to 18 years. However, that has caused some concern in the film industry about people who are either under the age of 18 years or depicted as being under that age. For artistic purposes and otherwise that may cause some concern. We are not talking about the depiction of sexual intercourse, but depiction that could involve people who are under the age of 18 years or considered as being under that age. A number of well-known movies and films have been mentioned. The Attorney-General and I have discussed the inclusion in this provision of television shows such as Neighbours, right through to the American Pie-type of movie where, although no sexual intercourse is depicted, some circumstances may be considered to be offensive. To get around that the Attorney-General has given me the house amendments. He may have to expand on them before summing up, but it would appear that they address that issue simply by adopting the notion that if a film is restricted classification, unclassified or X-rated, it would be prohibited because they pick up all those matters in any event. It would still be unlawful to produce or to sell X-rated, restricted classification or unclassified films in the state. I am content with the amendments as they have been put by the Attorney-General, but he may want to sum up in that way. Finally, there have been amendments in relation to anomalies in the prosecution of cases here in Victoria -- for example, there has been the case of Robinson against Vanston. I have received a copy of that judgment. Unfortunately I got it only this morning and have only had a cursory look at it. I have not read it in any depth, but it is clear that there is a problem with the seizure and production of that material in relation to X-rated videos that were being sold in the state of Victoria. There has been the long and turgid prosecution of a number of defendants. Many particular points were challenged, including the definition of 'possession', and that an employee could not be in possession of an employer's product, whether they be X-rated videos or otherwise. There were issues relating to the production of warrants and the execution of those warrants, and there was material concerning the actual certification of illegal X-rated videos. My view is that those matters are probably still extant and the amendments made in this legislation take the ball a little bit further, but I still express a concern that the whole scheme of the act is probably flawed and can only be guaranteed to have benefit in ensuring proper prosecutions if it is brought into line with legislation right around this country. Perhaps it might involve the adoption of a uniform standard of not only classification but also classification as to what can and cannot be sold. Unless the federal scheme is adopted it will be impossible to deal with the really nasty films -- that is, the products containing child pornography, bestiality and violent pornography -- that may otherwise be purchased. However, that is just a passing comment. With those short remarks I indicate the opposition will not be opposing this legislation. Mr RYAN (Leader of The Nationals) -- The Nationals are in support of the legislation. Victoria participates in a national classification scheme regarding publications, films and computer games, and the means by which that participation occurs is to have each state and territory jurisdiction pass its own act to reflect that of the commonwealth level. This bill represents the Victorian equivalent of the commonwealth legislation. In 2003 new classification guidelines were released, which merged those guidelines applicable to films and computer games. That happened because of the dynamics of the multimedia we now have in our society. It was recognised that amendments would need to be provided to enable a consistent set of classification symbols for names, films and computer games. In March 2004 all ministers at all levels of government undertook to make the necessary legislative amendments to achieve that outcome. This bill amends the law in Victoria and mirrors the legislation that was passed at the commonwealth level in May 2004. The change in the names of classification types does not affect the type of material permitted in each classification, and that is an important issue for people to understand. The new common classification types for films and computer games are as detailed within the second-reading speech and particularly at paragraph 3 of page 3. They are there to be read, and I do not intend taking the house through them. Page 35 The sale, hire and exhibition of refused classification and X 18-plus films will continue to be illegal in Victoria. Classification types which include reference to an age -- that is, MA 15-plus and R 18-plus -- indicate that legally enforceable age restrictions apply, whereas classifications G, PG and M are advisory in nature. A number of improved enforcement measures are set out in the bill, including enforcement of seized items. There are also provisions for evidentiary certificates which in effect reflect the relevant form of the classification. They are granted under the commonwealth act and their use will be more ably effected in Victorian prosecutions because of amendments in this legislation. There is a final amendment regarding child exploitation. At present children under 16 cannot be involved in activities involving sexual exploitation. That age limit is now to be lifted to children under 18. I note the amendments which the Attorney-General has brought to the house, and I have also had the opportunity to hear the commentary by the member for Kew. Again, they appear to me to be matters which accord with our basic view that this legislation should be supported. I raise one issue in passing to do with clause 8(2) of the bill, which deals with a forfeiture of the provisions. Proposed subsection 75A(1A)(a) refers to the fact that if 10 films are found to be classified as RC or X 18+, they can be the subject of forfeiture. Proposed paragraph (b) refers to publications or computer games that are classified RC. Similarly, proposed paragraph (c) refers to 'objectionable publications'. Is it the intention that whereas in the case of the films there is no doubt that 10 is the relevant number that is the guide, is it intended in proposed paragraph (b) that there be 10 publications and 10 computer games, or is it intended that there be a cumulative number of 10 comprising publications or computer games? Similarly, that query stands in relation to proposed paragraph (c). Subject to that matter, I advise the house that The Nationals support this legislation. Sitting suspended 1.00 p.m. until 2.03 p.m. Business interrupted pursuant to standing orders. ***
Title: Classification guidelines: films Classification guidelines: films Hon. B. N. ATKINSON (Koonung) presented petition from certain citizens of Victoria requesting that the Legislative Council amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1995 to allow adult films classified X to be sold from restricted premises in Victoria (4788 signatures). Quite why Bruce Mildenhall (Labor Party) considers this proposal to be: "...... an extraordinary policy proposition that has been put as an alternative to current government and indeed national approaches to the distribution of this material -- a very controversial proposal." It seems that this is a very sensible idea. It is perfectly legal for Victorians to purchase X18+ rated films by mail order from the ACT or NT, yet it is illegal to purchase them in the State. This has not prevented unclassified hardcore films being widely available for sale/rent in the Victoria. Compare this with the ACT where it is near impossible to find an Adult film that has not been rated by the OFLC.
Nicholas Kotsiras (Liberal Party) parrots the usual scare tactics used
against games. He mentions MANHUNT, but seems unaware that it has been
banned in Australia. "..... you can pick up a prostitute and have sex with her in the back of your stolen car" Not in Australia! Due to the lack of a R18+ rating for games, this game play was removed from the game prior to submission to the OFLC. As for the other games he mentions. RUMBLE ROSES was rated M 15+ (Sexual References, Medium Level Animated Violence) by the OFLC. The sexual references in THE GUY GAME would probably be enough to see to it banned in Australia. According to the online sources JFK RELOADED is only available as a download from the Traffic website.
Elizabeth Powell (National Party) mentions the campaign against a Club X store opening in Shepparton. This is part of a push by the Christian Right to try and prevent Adult stores from operating in Australia.
The game that Jude Perera (Labor Party) mentions would seem to be NARC. This was covered above. He claims: " These types of games glamorise drug addiction and could be triggers for psychotic behaviour."
Finally, it was good to see Andrew Leighton (Labor Party) speak out in favour of an R18+ rating for games. *** Title: CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (ENFORCEMENT) (AMENDMENT) BILL House: Council CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (ENFORCEMENT) (AMENDMENT) BILL Introduction and first reading Received from Assembly. Read first time for Hon. J. M. MADDEN (Minister for Sport and Recreation) on motion of Hon. M. R. Thomson. *** Speakers here are:
House: Council For Hon. J. M. MADDEN (Minister for Sport and Recreation), Mr Lenders (Minister for Finance) -- I move: That, pursuant to sessional order 34, the second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard. Some minor technical amendments to this bill were passed in the Legislative Assembly dealing with definitions. They are included in the second-reading speech being presented here today. Motion agreed to. Mr LENDERS (Minister for Finance) -- I move: That the bill be now read a second time. Incorporated speech as follows: The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) (Enforcement) (Amendment) Bill makes a number of miscellaneous amendments to improve the operation of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) (Enforcement) Act 1995 ('the act'). The bill makes amendments to: implement uniform classification types for films and computer games as agreed to by all censorship ministers; improve the operation and effectiveness of enforcement action under the act; and increase victim age thresholds from 'under 16' to 'under 18' in compliance with International Labour Organisation Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labour. Victoria participates in a national classification scheme for the classification of films, publications and computer games. The national classification scheme assists consumers to choose films and computer games by assigning a classification and consumer advice to classified products. In particular, many parents rely on the classification scheme to make viewing decisions for their children. The national classification scheme is a cooperative arrangement between the commonwealth, states and territories and was established by commonwealth legislation -- the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 ('the commonwealth act'). The commonwealth act provides that the classification board classifies films (including videos and DVDs), computer games, and certain publications in accordance with the National Classification Code and the classification guidelines. The states and territories enforce classification decisions under their respective enforcement legislation. Given the cooperative nature of the scheme, when agreement is reached to amend the scheme, it is then necessary for each jurisdiction to correspondingly amend their legislation. This bill contains amendments of this nature. In 2003, new classification guidelines were released which merged the classification guidelines for films and computer games in recognition of converging digital media. However, the names used to describe each classification category still differed between films and computer games. To support the new guidelines, it was recognised that legislative amendments would be required to provide for a consistent set of classification symbols and names for films and computer games. In March 2004, all state, territory and commonwealth censorship ministers undertook to make the necessary legislative amendments. In May 2004, the commonwealth passed the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Act 2004 ('the commonwealth amendment act'). These amendments implement common classification types for films and computer games and are consistent with the agreement of censorship ministers. The change to the names of the classification types does not affect the type of material permitted in each classification. This bill complements the commonwealth amendment act and will commence at the same time. The bill implements uniform classification categories for films and computer games which will significantly assist consumer decision making regarding classified products. The amendments replace references to the old classification category types with the new. Accordingly, references to the old computer game classifications of G(8+), M(15+) and MA(15+) are replaced by PG, M and MA 15+ respectively. Similarly, references to film classifications of MA, R and X are replaced by MA 15+, R 18+ and X 18+. The new common classification types for films and computer games will be known as G, PG, M, MA 15+ and RC (Refused Classification).The R 18+ and X 18+ categories will apply only to films. The sale, hire and exhibition of RC and X 18+ films will continue to be illegal in Victoria. The implementation of uniform classification categories for films and computer games will fulfil several important objectives. Research conducted by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) indicates that there is strong community awareness and understanding of the film classification scheme. However, in contrast, only 43 per cent of the population are even aware that computer games are classified. The introduction of uniform classification category names for films and computer games will enhance community awareness and understanding of computer game classification by utilising the well-known and well-understood film classification types. In particular, parents will benefit by only having to understand one set of classification names and will therefore be better informed to choose suitable computer games for their children. The modified classification type names have been devised so as to create a useful distinction between those classification Page 46 The use of the age descriptors to denote legally enforceable age restrictions also helps consumers differentiate between the M and MA classification. OFLC research indicates a high level of confusion as many consumers think M and MA are the same. The age descriptor is now attached only to MA 15+ thereby indicating that this is a legally enforceable age restriction whereas M is advisory. A more accessible and understandable classification scheme as proposed by this bill will assist consumers in choosing classified products. Uniform classification type names for films and computer games makes sense for busy parents who will now only need to be familiar with one set of classification terms. Forfeiture This bill makes a number of amendments to the act which will improve the effectiveness of enforcement action under the act. In particular, this bill amends the act to provide an additional means to trigger forfeiture of seized items to the Crown. The bill inserts new forfeiture provisions that will apply where a person has been found guilty of a classification offence (or offences) involving 10 or more films, publications or computer games. The offence must involve one of the following: films classified RC or X 18+; or publications or computer games classified RC; or objectionable films or objectionable publications. Forfeiture then applies to those films, publications or computer games that were seized at the same time and same premises as the films, publications or computer games which relate to the offences. However, the bill provides safeguards against forfeiture of items which are not banned which can be returned by order of the Magistrates Court. Evidentiary certificates Some minor amendments to the evidentiary provisions have also been considered necessary, to ensure that prosecutions do not fail for technical reasons. Section 78 of the act gives evidentiary force to certificates granted under the commonwealth act. These certificates state the relevant classification (if any) of the film, publication or computer game and are required to prove offences under the act. The proposed amendments to section 78 make it clear that copy certificates are acceptable, and that a certificate can be relied upon in a prosecution under the act as evidence of classification (or non-classification) at a date or dates in the past. The bill also contains some minor amendments which for the avoidance of doubt explicitly provide that an evidentiary certificate obtained in respect of a particular film, publication or computer game similarly applies to copies which have identifying particulars which correlate with the particulars listed on the certificate (for example in the case of a film, title, running time, producer et cetera). Child exploitation The final amendments in the bill address child exploitation and compliance with the objectives of the International Labour Organisation Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labour. The convention seeks to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, including the use, procuring or offering of a child (under 18) for prostitution, production of pornography or for pornographic purposes. The Victorian government strongly supports ratification of this convention. Promoting the physical, sexual, emotional and psychological safety of all young people is a priority for this government. The bill ensures that Victorian laws meet the objectives of the convention by providing that existing criminal offences concerning children and pornography apply to children under 18 rather than 16. The house amendments (passed in the Legislative Assembly) clarify the scope of the definitions of 'objectionable film', 'objectionable publication', 'objectionable material' and 'child pornography' offences. These amendments remove unnecessary wording from the definitions in respect of sexual depictions and therefore provide greater certainty for film-makers, publishers and others, whilst still ensuring children under 18 are protected from sexual exploitation. The definitions of 'objectionable film', 'objectionable publication', and 'objectionable material' will encompass child pornography because the national classification code Refused Classification category already forms part of the definition. The Refused Classification definition in the national classification code includes depictions and descriptions of persons under 18 that are likely to offend a reasonable adult. Therefore these amendments provide appropriate scope for legitimate film-makers, writers, and others, to deal with the subject of teenage sexuality provided this is not done in an offensive manner. The bill also amends the Crimes Act 1958 to provide safeguards so that legitimate filmmakers and others are not unfairly criminalised. The Crimes Act currently provides various defences to the offence of possessing child pornography. In particular, it is a defence to prove that the film photograph or computer game in question was classified other than RC or X 18+. In other words, if the material was classified G, PG, M, MA 15+ or R 18+ then that will provide a defence against the offence of possession of child pornography. This defence is not available to the offences of production and procurement of child pornography. To ensure a consistent approach, the proposed house amendments will extend this defence to the offences of production and procurement of child pornography. Therefore if the material is classified as G, PG, M, Ma 15+ or R 18+, then a defence will be available. Page 47 The classification offences in question have been in the act since 1995 and it is timely to assess the Victorian provisions in light of national developments and any prospective changes to child pornography laws. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. C. A. STRONG (Higinbotham). Debate adjourned until next day. ****** Those of you in
Melbourne and Sydney may like to get along to special Popcorn Taxi
preview screenings of 9 SONGS. Originally classified X18+ in November,
its rating was dropped to R18+ by the Review Board. It is due for
release in May. Michael
Winterbottom's 9 Songs caused a furore at its premiere at Cannes last
year as it consists almost entirely of unsimulated Popcorn
Taxi presents a special preview screening of one of most controversial
films of the last decade;
****** The report for the 2004 Community Assessment Panels has now been released.
Report shows Classification Board in line with Australian standards Commonwealth, State and Territory Censorship Ministers and the Office of Film and Literature Classification released research findings today that show decisions being made by the Classification Board accurately reflect current Australian community standards towards film and computer game entertainment. The findings are part of a report on community assessment panel research conducted in Canberra, Alice Springs and Melbourne during 2004. Community assessment panels are made up of 20 members of the public who are recruited across various ages and backgrounds to provide independent classification assessments of films and computer games that have already been classified by the Classification Board, but not yet publicly released. Without knowing the decision that the Board has made, the panels apply the same procedures and criteria to arrive at their own decisions. Community Assessment panels are conducted approximately every five years to test the extent to which the Classification Board’s decisions are in line with community standards. Outcomes from the 2004 research show a high level of agreement between the panels and the Classification Board, with the same classification being allocated for 8 out of the 12 films and computer games used in testing. Previous community assessment panels, undertaken in Sydney, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Wagga Wagga and Bendigo in 1997 and 1999, also found overall high levels of agreement between the panels and the Board. This research clearly shows that the Classification Board is fulfilling its purpose in assisting adults to make informed entertainment choices for themselves and those in their care. Media contacts: Kathryn Reidy Office of Film and Literature Classification 02 9289 7123 or 0438 889 759 BACKGROUNDER After the success of CAPs in 1997 and 1999, Commonwealth, State and Territory Censorship Ministers commissioned a third round of three panels. These were conducted in Canberra, Alice Springs and Melbourne during 2004. Structure and function of the panels The panels each comprised about 20 people of various ages and backgrounds, drawn from a broad cross-section of metropolitan and regional Australia. The panels provide assessments of films and computer games that have been classified by the Commonwealth’s Classification Board. Feedback from panel members will also help the Classification Board apply current community standards to its decision making. Panel procedures After being briefed on the meaning and application of the classification guidelines, the panels view films and view and play computer games, and then record their initial responses including their choice of classification. Following panel discussion after each film or game, final classifications are proposed, and later compared with the actual classifications assigned by the Board. The Classification Board is an independent, statutory body that makes classification decisions about films, computer games and some publications. The Board is selected to broadly represent the Australian community, and in required to make decisions in accordance with community standards. ****** Two more old censorship decisions to add to the database. Despite being released on video, DEADLY SUNDAY and BLACK ANGELS were both banned in 1984. As is the case with the majority of these older listings, these days both would pose no problems for the OFLC. |
| March 4th | The gloves are off! Siren are appealing against the RC rating awarded to IN A GLASS GAGE. Hopefully THE GORE GORE GIRLS will not be far behind.
23 February 2005 MEMBERS:
The Hon Trevor Griffin (Deputy Convenor) APPLICANT: Roadshow Film Distributors Pty Ltd (Roadshow), represented by Mr Brett Rosengarten, National Sales Manager. BUSINESS: To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the film Constantine (the film) MA15+ with the consumer advice ‘Horror themes’. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION 1. Decision The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the film M with the consumer advice ‘Horror and supernatural themes’. 2. Legislative provisions The Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act) governs the classification of films and the review of classification decisions. Section 9 of the Act provides that films are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines. Three essential principles underlie the use of the • The importance of context • Assessing impact • Six classifiable elements – themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity 3. Procedure The Review Board viewed the film, received a written submission from the applicant, heard an oral presentation by Mr Brett Rosengarten, National Sales Manager of the applicant and then considered those matters, and the material in paragraph 4 below, in private. 4. Evidence and other material taken into account In reaching its decision the Review Board had regard to the following: (i) Roadshow’s application for review; (ii) Roadshow’s written and oral submissions; (iii) The film; (iv) The Classification Board’s report; (v) the relevant provisions in the Act; (vi) the relevant provisions in the Code, as amended in accordance with s.6 of the Act; and (vii) the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2003. 5 Synopsis John Constantine has a special gift that he uses to keep the denizens of Hell at bay. When the twin sister of Los Angeles detective Angela Dodson kills herself by jumping from a multi-storey mental hospital building, Constantine finds himself in a race to prevent Satan’s son taking over the earth. 6 Findings on material questions of fact The Review Board found that the classifiable elements of the film are Themes and Violence. The Review Board applied the Guidelines in determining the impact of these elements and concluded that there is no overwhelming threat presented in the film, that there is little repetition of particular horror scenes and the “horror” scenes, generally, did not look real. In fact, there was a lack of realism throughout the film and no part of the film was likely to encourage interactivity. Apart from the bath scene (at 67 minutes) where Constantine holds Angela under the water in her visit to Hell, the scenes of horror are not prolonged – even this scene is not unduly prolonged and it lacks realism. Special effects are used extensively but do not create a sense of realism. Examples of this occur at 28 minutes when a demon comprising bugs attacks Constantine and at 43 minutes when Constantine visits Hell and is confronted by emaciated demons with the tops of their heads cut off. There are numerous other scenes where special effects are used, accompanied by sound effects, where a fantasy context is reiterated. 7 Reasons for the decision While the film contains horror and supernatural scenes, they are more stylised than realistic and are presented in a fantasy context. These themes are of moderate impact rather than strong. 8 Summary Because the impact of the classifiable elements is moderate, the Review Board determined that the classification of the film Constantine is M with the consumer advice being ‘Horror and supernatural themes’. ****** On Monday the South Australian Liberal opposition supported the passage of the S.A. Classification Amendment Bill. The bill was introduced in November last year, its progress is shown below. HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Wednesday 24 November 2004 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (TYPES OF CLASSIFICATIONS) AMENDMENT BILL The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Attorney-General) obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. Read a first time. The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Our present law requires that both films and computer games must be classified before they go on sale. There is one set of categories and symbols for films and another for games. Research results published by the Office of Film and Literature Classification in March this year, however, suggest that, whereas most people are familiar with the film classifications, many have only a superficial idea of the classifications that apply to computer games. Parents who took part in the study often reported that, although they took classification into account in choosing films for their children, they made little use of the classifications in choosing computer games. This was despite expressions of concern about what children are exposed to in computer games. A consumer warning system works best if it is easy for the public to recognise and apply. It therefore needs to be as simple as possible. Accordingly, censorship ministers decided that it may assist the public, and parents in particular, if, instead of having two different sets of classifications, the familiar categories and symbols applicable to films were also applied to computer games. Earlier this year, therefore, the commonwealth amended the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 so that the same categories now apply to both films and games. Computer games classified in future will bear the same labels as films of the same classification. Parents are more likely to recognise and understand these labels, so they should be better able to select suitable games for their children. I seek leave to insert the balance of my remarks into Hansard without reading them aloud. Leave granted. It is important to point out two things, however. First, Ministers decided that there should not be an R category for computer games, as there is for films. Computer games are especially popular with children. Whereas a parent can, if in doubt, watch the film for himself, parents often lack the skill to examine a computer game in full. At the same time, parents are concerned about children being exposed to extremely violent or sexually-explicit material, such as might be found in an R film. In these circumstances, it has been decided that material higher than MA, if found in a computer game, will result in an RC classification, that is, the game will not be legal for sale. Second, because computer games are interactive, with increasing levels of difficulty, rewards for certain results and a competitive element, their impact may be different from the impact of films, which are watched passively. It is important that this interactive aspect is weighed in the classification process. The classification guidelines provide for this, so it could be that the same content in a game might result in a higher classification than if that content were found in a film. Impact, which includes interactivity, will be taken into account. The adoption of a single system of labelling does not, therefore, connote a drop in classification standards for computer games. As well as applying the same categories to films and games, the Commonwealth amendments slightly change the category titles to make clearer the distinction between advisory categorise and legally-restricted categories. The categories G, PG and M are not legally restricted. That is, even though an M classification means that the film is not recommended for anyone under 15, it is quite legal for such a person to see an M film. The M classification warns parents that the film may not be suitable for younger children, but it is left to parents to decide whether or not their children should see the film, and whether to watch it with them. The categories MA15+, R18+, X18+ and RC, on the other hand, are legally restricted. A child under 15 is not allowed into a cinema to see an MA15+ film unless accompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Likewise R films, as most people know, are legally restricted to adults only. Neither X nor RC films can be legally screened or sold in South Australia. To highlight this difference, under the Commonwealth amendments, advisory categories will be labelled with letters only: G, PG or M. The legally-restricted categories will be labelled with both letters and age descriptors: for example, MA15+ or R18+. It is hoped that this will help parents distinguish, in particular, between M and MA, categories that are often confused. The Office of Film and Literature Classification's research showed that only 6% of the sample could correctly interpret the MA15+ symbol. There is a great difference between the content of these two categories. The M category contains material of moderate impact such that the film or game is not recommended for under-15s. About half of all cinema-release films are classified M. A film could, for instance, be classified M because it includes coarse language, even though it includes no violence, drug use or explicit sexual activity. The Australian film The Dish, a story about the 1969 moonshot, set at the satellite-tracking station at Parkes, is an example. The MA category, on the other hand, contains strong-impact material such that a person under 15 is not permitted by law to attend the film unless he has a parent or adult guardian present with him throughout. A film classified MA15+ may contain strong violence or confronting treatments of social problems. The New Zealand film Once Were Warriors, dealing with domestic violence and alcohol abuse in a Maori family, is an example. More recently, the film Thirteen was classified MA15+. That film, as Members may know, dealt in a confronting manner with the themes of peer pressure and intergenerational conflict. It depicted young teenagers engaging in drug use, self-mutilation, sexual activity and petty crime. Parents need to be aware of the difference between the two categories. The Commonwealth amendments necessitate consequential amendments to State and Territory enforcement Acts. That is the purpose of this Bill. The Bill renames the film and computer game categories to match the amended Commonwealth Act. This is necessary because, in general, items are classified by the Commonwealth authority, the Classification Board, and those classifications apply in South Australia by force of our Act. Unless the classifications match, enforcement will be problematic. The transitional provisions under both the Commonwealth and State laws provide that material already classified will be treated as having been classified in the relevant new category. For instance, a computer game now classified G8+ will be treated as if it had always been classified PG. This is necessary to avoid creating an enforcement loophole. It is not intended, however, that retailers should have to relabel all the stock now lawfully on their shelves. The intention is that the old labels can remain. Thus, there will be no need to change the G8+ label. The Government understands that this will be achieved through the process of fixing the required markings by the national Director under the Commonwealth Act. The Bill, in combination with the recent Commonwealth amendments, should make it easier for parents to identify suitable films and games for their children. In the case of games, the poorly-recognised separate classifications for games will be replaced with the familiar classifications for films, which nearly everyone recognises. In the case of both films and games, the new categories more clearly emphasise the difference between advisory categories and legally-restricted material. In this day and age, anything that helps parents to make informed choices about what their children see and play must be beneficial. I commend the Bill to Members. The Hon. I.F. EVANS secured the adjournment of the debate. ****** HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Monday 14 February 2005 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (TYPES OF CLASSIFICATION) AMENDMENT BILL Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 24 November. Page 1060.) Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg): This bill was introduced by the Attorney-General on 24 November 2004. It is a bill to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computers Games) Act 1995 and essentially has two effects. The first is to change the categories and symbols of classification which apply to computer games. They will now be the same as those applying to films. The second is apparently to simplify the classification of letters and symbols to make it easier for parents to identify particular classifications. The opposition supports this bill. It is a bill which follows similar legislation passed earlier this year by the commonwealth parliament. All censorship ministers have agreed to adopt this new system. One reason for the changes is the fact that research by the Office of Film and Literature Classification has shown that the existing classifications for computer games are not well understood by parents. New classifications for film, in ascending order, will be: G, general; PG, parental guidance; M, mature; MA, 15+ (it sounds like a sunscreen); mature, accompanied; R, 18+, some restricted; X, 18+, restricted; and RC, refused classification. The following classifications for computer games will be: G, general; PG, parental guidance; M, mature; MA, 15+; mature, accompanied; and RC, refused classification. I understand the new commonwealth act will come into effect on 26 May this year, and accordingly the government wishes to have the bill passed by then. As indicated, the Liberal Party supports the bill without amendment. However, I cannot let this bill and the enthusiasm with which the government has presented it, championing the importance for parents to have a clear understanding of the classification of both film and computer games and to have some similarity in their classification to ease the burden for parents in their being able to understand them, without making the following comment. In the very same week of the introduction of this bill, this government (through the Minister for Education and Children's Services) pleads the case for not even allowing parents to have a copy of the SHine sex education questionnaire. I think everyone in this house acknowledges that this information is important to children and that we have to balance the educative and informative benefit to children against either age inappropriate or excessive material which could cause them some harm. #76 I find some inconsistency in the government's enthusiasm for providing for parents this easy reference, because it fails to deal with any openness on sex education currently trialing in our schools, and in particular the haste to hide from parents a copy of the questionnaire to which I referred. As a brief example, last year the government was enthusiastic to announce a code of practice in relation to the censorship and classification of literature in school libraries. A code of practice was to be introduced early last yearI have not seen it yet, but the government announced it would have oneto ensure that literature in school libraries is identified for the purposes of ensuring that inappropriate sexual or excessively violent material is not exposed to children in those circumstances. Whilst the Liberal Party supports this initiative, I would only hope the government would be a little consistent in some other areas of child protection and ensure that the literature and educative programs they are receiving, even on a trial basis, would have the same protection. Perhaps the Attorney ought to look at those matters and cast an eye over the shoulder of the Minister for Education and Children's Services to see what is going on in the other direction. Bill read a second time and taken through its remaining stages ****** LEGISLATIVE
COUNCIL CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (TYPES OF CLASSIFICATION) AMENDMENT BILL Received from the House of Assembly and read a first time. The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Industry and Trade): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading speech and explanation of clauses incorporated in Hansard without my reading them. Leave granted. Our present law requires that both films and computer games must be classified before they go on sale. There is one set of categories and symbols for films and another for games. Research results published by the Office of Film and Literature Classification in March this year, however, suggest that whereas most people are familiar with the film classifications, many have only a superficial idea of the classifications that apply to computer games. Parents who took part in the study often reported that, although they took classification into account in choosing films for their children, they made little use of the classifications in choosing computer games. This was despite expressions of concern about what children are exposed to in computer games. A consumer-warning system works best if it is easy for the public to recognise and apply. It therefore needs to be as simple as possible. Accordingly, censorship Ministers decided that it may assist the public, and parents in particular, if, instead of having two different sets of classifications, the familiar categories and symbols applicable to films were also applied to computer games. Earlier this year, therefore, the Commonwealth amended the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 so that the same categories now apply to both films and games. Computer games classified in future will bear the same labels as films of the same classification. Parents are more likely to recognise and understand these labels, so they should be better able to select suitable games for their children. It is important to point out two things, however. First, Ministers decided that there should not be an R category for computer games, as there is for films. Computer games are especially popular with children. Whereas a parent can, if in doubt, watch the film for himself, parents often lack the skill to examine a computer game in full. At the same time, parents are concerned about children being exposed to extremely violent or sexually-explicit material, such as might be found in an R film. In these circumstances, it has been decided that material higher than MA, if found in a computer game, will result in an RC classification, that is, the game will not be legal for sale. Second, because computer games are interactive, with increasing levels of difficulty, rewards for certain results and a competitive element, their impact may be different from the impact of films, which are watched passively. It is important that this interactive aspect is weighed in the classification process. The classification guidelines provide for this, so it could be that the same content in a game might result in a higher classification than if that content were found in a film. Impact, which includes interactivity, will be taken into account. The adoption of a single system of labelling does not, therefore, connote a drop in classification standards for computer games. As well as applying the same categories to films and games, the Commonwealth amendments slightly change the category titles to make clearer the distinction between advisory categorise and legally-restricted categories. The categories G, PG and M are not legally restricted. That is, even though an M classification means that the film is not recommended for anyone under 15, it is quite legal for such a person to see an M film. The M classification warns parents that the film may not be suitable for younger children, but it is left to parents to decide whether or not their children should see the film, and whether to watch it with them. The categories MA15+, R18+, X18+ and RC, on the other hand, are legally restricted. A child under 15 is not allowed into a cinema to see an MA15+ film unless accompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Likewise R films, as most people know, are legally restricted to adults only. Neither X nor RC films can be legally screened or sold in South Australia. To highlight this difference, under the Commonwealth amendments, advisory categories will be labelled with letters only: G, PG or M. The legally-restricted categories will be labelled with both letters and age descriptors: for example, MA15+ or R18+. It is hoped that this will help parents distinguish, in particular, between M and MA, categories that are often confused. The Office of Film and Literature Classification's research showed that only 6% of the sample could correctly interpret the MA15+ symbol. There is a great difference between the content of these two categories. The M category contains material of moderate impact such that the film or game is not recommended for under-15s. About half of all cinema-release films are classified M. A film could, for instance, be classified M because it includes coarse language, even though it includes no violence, drug use or explicit sexual activity. The Australian film The Dish, a story about the 1969 moonshot, set at the satellite-tracking station at Parkes, is an example. The MA category, on the other hand, contains strong-impact material such that a person under 15 is not permitted by law to attend the film unless he has a parent or adult guardian present with him throughout. A film classified MA15+ may contain strong violence or confronting treatments of social problems. The New Zealand film Once Were Warriors, dealing with domestic violence and alcohol abuse in a Maori family, is an example. More recently, the film Thirteen was classified MA15+. That film, as Members may know, dealt in a confronting manner with the themes of peer pressure and intergenerational conflict. It depicted young teenagers engaging in drug use, self-mutilation, sexual activity and petty crime. Parents need to be aware of the difference between the two categories. The Commonwealth amendments necessitate consequential amendments to State and Territory enforcement Acts. That is the purpose of this Bill. The Bill renames the film and computer game categories to match the amended Commonwealth Act. This is necessary because, in general, items are classified by the Commonwealth authority, the Classification Board, and those classifications apply in South Australia by force of our Act. Unless the classifications match, enforcement will be problematic. The transitional provisions under both the Commonwealth and State laws provide that material already classified will be treated as having been classified in the relevant new category. For instance, a computer game now classified G8+ will be treated as if it had always been classified PG. This is necessary to avoid creating an enforcement loophole. It is not intended, however, that retailers should have to relabel all the stock now lawfully on their shelves. The intention is that the old labels can remain. Thus, there will be no need to change the G8+ label. The Government understands that this will be achieved through the process of fixing the required markings by the national Director under the Commonwealth Act. The Bill, in combination with the recent Commonwealth amendments, should make it easier for parents to identify suitable films and games for their children. In the case of games, the poorly-recognised separate classifications for games will be replaced with the familiar classifications for films, which nearly everyone recognises. In the case of both films and games, the new categories more clearly emphasise the difference between advisory categories and legally-restricted material. In this day and age, anything that helps parents to make informed choices about what their children see and play must be beneficial. I commend the Bill to Members. The Hon. R.D. LAWSON secured the adjournment of the debate. ****** LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Monday 28 February 2005 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (TYPES OF CLASSIFICATIONS) AMENDMENT BILL Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 15 February. Page 1041.) The Hon. R.D. LAWSON: I rise to indicate that the Liberal opposition will be supporting the passage of this bill, which amends the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. This bill has two effects. First, it changes the categories and symbols of classification which apply to computer games; they will now be the same as those that apply to films. Secondly, it seeks to simplify the classification of letters and symbols (that is, the well known PG, R, M, etc.) to make it easier for parents to identify particular classifications. The bill follows similar legislation passed earlier this year by the commonwealth parliament, and all censorship ministers have agreed to adopt this new system. Information provided by the government suggests that the commonwealth bill will come into operation on 26 May this year. Accordingly, it is desired that the bill pass through this parliament expeditiously, and we are happy to comply. We believe that a national censorship system is appropriate. There are a number of reservations sometimes, serious reservations expressed about the current system. In fact, some of the recent decisions in relation to the classification of movies by the Classification Review Board have been described as outrageous by the Festival of Light. Those decisions include the R rating for the film Nine Songs and the MA rating for the film Birth. It is not surprising that from time to time the South Australian Attorney-General expresses his disagreement with classification matters. However, he rarely appears to exercise the power which he has to seek a review of classifications. Mrs Ros Phillips, the research officer for the Festival of Light, has indicated to me her dismay at the 2003 rewrite of the classification guidelines for films and computer games. In her view, recent classification decisions have shifted in a more permissive direction despite a written assurance from the Office of Film and Literature Classification to the effect that classification standards would remain unchanged after those new guidelines came into operation. Notwithstanding the reservations that Mrs Phillips and others have expressed, we believe that the current system, with all its imperfections, is working satisfactorily. The fact that some ministers choose to express reservations about particular decisions of the classification board, but then refuse to take the steps open to them to have those reviewed, is really a comment on the commitment of a particular minister rather than an adverse comment on the system itself. One reason advanced for these changes is the fact that research by the Office of Film and Literature Classification has shown that the existing classifications for computer games are not well understood by parents. I certainly agree with that research. My understanding is not based upon any research or examination of research but my own experience of trying to discern classifications. The new classifications for film will be G for general, PG for parental guidance, M for mature, MA15+ to indicate mature as well as the fact that the viewer should be accompanied by an adult, R18+ is restricted, X18+ is also restricted, and RC is refused classification. The classifications for computer games will be G for general, PG for parental guidance, M for mature, MA15+ for mature accompanied, and RC for refused classification. There will be no X-rated or R-rated computer games. Any system which provides parents with easily accessible and understood guidelines is to be welcomed. We will support the passage of the bill without amendment. The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO secured the adjournment of the debate. ****** LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Thursday 3 March 2005 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) (TYPES OF CLASSIFICATIONS) AMENDMENT BILL Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 28 February. Page 1178.) The Hon. IAN GILFILLAN: I indicate Democrat support for the bill, but with some misgivings. The actual effect of the bill is to bring the classification scheme for computer games into line with the scheme used to rate films and, as such, it represents a simplification of existing overlapping schemes, which is a desirable achievement in itself. There is a clear difference, however, in that the adult R rating is not going to be available for computer games. Some members may recall that the founder of the Democrats, Don Chipp, as a minister in the Gorton government, broke through the censorship bonds which we in Australia had suffered from, which at that time imposed very oppressive restrictions on what people could read or view. It was a major reform, and it has been widely recognised since then that it was a watershed that gave people in this country the freedom to access material they had until then not been able to access. With this particular dilemma, we are confronting the restriction of computer games in a way that does not apply to films, and from that point of view we are seriously concerned that this is a step back into the restriction and control mechanisms we, as a nation, suffered for decades prior to the Don Chipp move to break out of them. The problem posed as being the reason for it is that unacceptable material will be available for access by children. We recognise that there is material which should not be made available for children's viewing or use, and most parents are aware of that and make efforts to ensure that that does not occur. Where we feel this is going too far is that a measure the government feels is important for the protection of children is going to backfire and actually impose unacceptable restrictions on what the adults in the community can enjoy, as far as computer games go. The irony is that South Australia is at the cutting edge of game development, as it is with several other niche market areas. Companies like Ratbag Games, for example, are evolving new product that has ready and acceptable markets, and the irony may well be that they will develop a product that can be legally sold around the world but not in Australia. At this stage I feel that the main point is to get uniformity and, therefore, we are supporting the second reading but signalling that it is clearly a restriction, a step back in what has been a reform or opening up of the freedom for adults in Australia to view and, in this case, enjoy the games they are entitled to because of what is seen as some sort of mechanism to protect children from playing certain games. I hope there will be an opportunity further down the track for this to be revisited as far as how the classifications are applied, whether they are appropriate and desirable and whether they work. At this stage, as far as getting uniformity is concerned, we indicate that we will be supporting the second reading. The Hon. NICK XENOPHON: I will make a brief contribution to indicate my support for the second reading of this bill. My understanding of the bill is that it is to bring a degree of uniformity between the states and the commonwealth in terms of classifications of computer games. I am a strong believer in an appropriate classification system. At the very least, it provides an appropriate level of consumer warning as to material that may offend or disturb. It is particularly important, in the context of parents hiring or allowing their children to buy computer games, that they know there is an appropriate system of classification in place that is clear and provides appropriate warnings. That is why I support this legislation in terms of that appropriate level of warning, particularly for parents in determining what children should see or interact with. I note that there have been campaigns in the past in relation to there being a similar system of classification for books, and I emphasise that that is not about censorship but to give some guidance to parents and schools as to the sorts of material there may be in books that could disturb or offend, particularly for younger children. I think that is something that ought to be looked at in the context of providing guidance and warning to consumers, particularly to parents of young children. I support the second reading of this bill. The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Industry and Trade): I thank all members for their indications of support and look forward to the speedy passage of the bill. Bill read a second time and taken through its remaining stages. The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Mr President, I draw your attention to the state of the council. A quorum having been formed:
|
| Updates | January - February 2005 |
