Tisch Lindsay: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Films Videos and Publications Classification  Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18706] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 National concurs with the views of the Minister—not all his views but certainly we have supported this bill through all its stages and we will continue to do so during the third reading debate. 
I want to summarise how National sees the bill. I think we need to take a step back to 1993 when the principal Act that we currently have was passed. Society has changed considerably. The emphasis then was on classifications that revolved around hard copy but with the advent of the Internet text messaging and chat rooms the scene has changed considerably. With that in mind National has supported this bill. 
It is also interesting to note what has happened in Australia. The Minister Phil Goff mentioned Australia. I have here a report from the Minister for Communications Information Technology and the Arts released last year headed: “Tough laws to target Internet child sex crime”. I will read the first paragraph because it summarises our position as well. This is what the Australians said last year: “Use of the Internet for accessing transmitting or making available child pornography will be punishable by ten years’ jail and using the Internet to procure or ‘groom’ children for sex will be punishable by up to fifteen years’ jail under proposed new laws released for public comment today.” 
That is what is happening in Australia and New Zealand is in line with that. However I think another comment that came from a report by the Standing Committee on Social Issues is important. The chairman stated: “At the centre of this inquiry has been the tension between the right of adults to see and hear what they want—a right that underpins democratic and cultural expression—and the need to ensure that vulnerable people especially children are protected from exposure to dangerous and exploitative material. While this tension has always been apparent in classification law it poses new problems in the rapidly developing medium of the Internet.” It is interesting that while we have been debating this over the last 12 months—and prior to that when we had the inquiry—the issues that other countries have also been facing are apparent. 
The bill will not go far enough for many people. They will certainly see it as not being tough enough in the direction they want to take. For others the bill will be seen as maybe too restrictive—and we heard that view during the Committee stage of the debate. It is certainly National’s view that the bill clarifies some of the important issues that have arisen since the 1993 Act was introduced. It deals with subject matter such as sex and it enables the Office of Film and Literature Classification to consider whether such material should be prohibited applying the same substantive rules that it does now. 
In relation to nude or partially nude images of children or young persons the chief censor is likely to assess whether a publication firstly deals with the subject matter in such a manner that the availability of the publication is “likely to be injurious to the public good” and secondly “promotes or supports or tends to promote or support the exploitation of children or young persons or both for sexual purposes:” With regard to the provision dealing with highly offensive language there is just a small number of publications that the bill captures. It does not deal with any of the objectionable grounds such as sex horror crime cruelty or violence but nevertheless it contains an emphasis on the quantity of highly offensive language and age restrictions then become justifiable. 
No one has talked about intimate covert filming which the bill does cover and I will mention that. The bill does focus on covert filming of another person without that person’s consent or knowledge in situations involving nudity or physical intimacy where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and I think that that is an important position. I talked about the display of restricted publications in relation to trailers for DVDs videos and films. They have a classification and a trailer should have whatever classification the film has. 
No one has talked about film festivals. They are not exempt from the legislation. The legislation requires all films to be rated classified and labelled before they are made available to the public. That underpins two fundamental objectives that National supports. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.