Mr BAIRD (4:32 PM) —I rise to draw the attention of the House to concerns raised by constituents in my electorate about items sold in the Granny May's Group of Companies, a well-known novelty goods retailer. The Miranda store displays all manner of sexually explicit material in its stores. I am no more prudish than the average person, and my political career can hardly be described as one of a morals crusader, but while I am not personally shocked or disgusted by the material I can well understand why parents would wish to keep young children from viewing it.

I visited the store on 6 August, following a complaint by a constituent, to determine whether the store management had a case to answer. Most visible from the front of the store are products that are primarily marketed towards children—indeed, gifts that children might expect to get from their granny at Christmas time: Star Wars, South Park and other merchandise. Inside, most of the material is equally inoffensive, including key rings, cups, boxer shorts and posters, most bearing simple and supposedly humorous messages.

Perhaps I had an old-fashioned granny, but I cannot ever recall receiving from her drink bottles shaped in the form of men's genitalia, sexually explicit bumper stickers, nude gift cards, T-shirts with frequent use of four-letter words and furry handcuffs—and this was only the material left on half-empty shelves when the Miranda shop was checked one week after my initial complaint. This material is kept on a shelf along the back wall of the store, alongside signs that warn patrons that the material they have no doubt just seen `may offend'. One would think that, if the products warrant such signage, certainly there is a case for that material to be put in a quarantined section of the store. At the very least, a sign should appear in the front window of the store giving the same warning.

I rang the store manager that afternoon to put this to him and have since received a letter from Granny May's marketing officer. The letter states that they `endeavour to keep this merchandise in one area and/or out of the sight of children' and that it is `company policy not to sell this product range to children'. The letter also states that the products do not contravene the `Obscene Publications Act'. No such act exists on either the federal or the New South Wales government statute books.

The legislation that covers the display of offensive material, however, is the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. The act is part of a Commonwealth, state and territory cooperative legislative scheme for the classification of publications, films and computer games and enforcement of classification decisions made under it. That act establishes the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board and provides the procedures for the classification of material. Complementary state and territory enforcement legislation contains offences relating to the exhibition, sale or hire of publications, films and computer games, both classified and unclassified, in the respective jurisdictions.

Part 3, section 24 of the New South Wales state government's Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act requires that certain publications not be shown to minors, including what are deemed `submittable publications'. A `submittable publication' is an unclassified publication that, having regard to the code and the classification guidelines to the extent that they relate to publication, contains depictions or descriptions of sexual matters, drugs, nudity or violence that are likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult to the extent that the publication should not be sold as a `unrestricted publication'.

As a rule of thumb, under the code, in terms of images, an unrestricted publication portrays nudity; a category 1 publication contains explicit nudity—for example, making external female genitalia visible—a category 2 publication contains explicit sexual activity; and a publication which is refused classification portrays prohibited sexual activity and sexual violence. In terms of language, an unrestricted publication has low to medium level language; category 1 publications contain high level language describing sexual activity in graphic detail; category 2 publications contain strong fetish material such as sadomasochism; and items that incite crimes, such as bestiality, are refused classification.

An Office of Film and Literature Classification community liaison officer has conducted inquiries into three Granny May's stores and What's New stores in Queensland and New South Wales. The officer's findings were reported to the Office of Film and Literature Classification on 17 August 1999. He found similar items to those in my electorate store, and these included some fairly explicit material. It is not appropriate to describe these in full detail at this time, but they were fairly explicit.

It is no wonder the marketing officer advised the Office of Film and Literature Classification that its policy for access to minors be restricted. I could see no evidence of such restriction in the particular store. Clearly, Granny May's adult range of products should be classified as unrestricted, based on the current code contained in the act. But the act measures what is acceptable for a reasonable adult, not what is acceptable for consumption by a young child. I recommend that stores which sell products which are classified unrestricted but which portray nudity or medium level language, like Granny May's, be forced either to segregate their adult section from the rest of the store or, alternatively, to carry a sign in the front window warning patrons that some of its products may offend.

In bringing these matters to the attention of the House, it is not my intention to do a Fred Nile in the federal parliament but rather to exercise my concern at the impact on small children who frequent the store. It is the result of genuine concern by constituents in my electorate. Granny May's have every right to merchandise their product which to adults would cause no concern, but if there is going to be this displaying of material in a retail store then there should be some classification, in the same way as happens in the average newsagent where some of the publications are sealed and some of them are kept in different parts of the store.

I believe that all members of the House who have a relatively open mind would still be concerned about the exposure of young children to some of this more explicit material. My intention in bringing this issue to the attention of the House today has been to point out that, while for adults this merchandising is not going to be an area of concern, this House should consider whether there should be some classification on the display of sexually explicit material in the stores. In providing that type of merchandise, either there should be a clear indication at the front of the store that that material exists so that parents may be aware of it or, alternatively, there should an adults only section which is available at the rear of the store. Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to bring this to the House.