Mr LINDSAY (11:47 AM) —In a way the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1999 could be a difficult bill to speak on and in another way it is quite straightforward. Some people in the community see it as a difficult issue. Some people have some very clear ideas on what the government should or should not be doing. But generally the community view would seem to be that families that are well adjusted do not have a problem with the kinds of material that can circulate in the community. They can leave it alone and not be concerned about it. But, be that as it may, the government has chosen to put through the parliament this classification amendment bill. I think it is a pretty sensible way of going. There was a suggestion that we abolish the X-rated category and create the non-violent erotica category. At the end of the day we have decided to retain the X category for sexually explicit films and videos but with much more restricted content. The Commonwealth's decision to retain the title X was taken after concerns were raised that the title of non-violent erotica did not accurately reflect the material contained in the category. While no agreement on an alternative title was reached, most state and territory censorship ministers indicated in March this year that they did not support calling the category non-violent pornography.

In Australia, the X-rated category is reserved for sexually explicit material and cannot contain any depiction of sexualised violence or coercion. It is proposed that the X-rated category will be subject to tighter guidelines than apply currently. The proposal is that the category will be further restricted to exclude materialsuch as the portrayal of people aged over 18 years as minorscertain fetishes and sexually aggressive language.

Under the national classification scheme, it is the responsibility of individual states and territories to determine what material can be sold or hired legally in their respective jurisdictions. State censorship ministers have made it clear that their previous agreement to the Commonwealth's bill did not imply any alteration to the ban on the sale or hire of X-rated films and videos. This bill supports the state and territory censorship ministers. The government welcomes the support of the opposition for the legislation. The opposition agree with the government's policy on X-rated videos, and they did so publicly at the last election. Most of the other amendments have been discussed with industry, and I think it is fair to say that they have been warmly supported.

Originally the amendments included the replacement of the X classification for videotapes with a new, more restrictive non-violent erotica classification. This has now been disregarded. However, this material includes mild fetishes, any depictions of violence, sexually aggressive language and the portrayal of persons over the age of 18 as minors in the X-rated classification.

I did note that there was a concerted campaign by the industry, which apparently suggested that they were a very powerful lobby and that they could influence the result of elections in this country. Many members and senators get these kinds of suggestions almost on a weekly basis—and I dare say you would, too, Madam Deputy Speaker Crosio—that if you do not do this or you do not do that, then you will suffer at the next election. But governments cannot run that way and members and senators cannot run that way. At the end of the day, what is in this bill was decided on the principle of the matter: it was decided on in the national interest, and it was decided on advice from the states and the territories. That is how governments should properly operate. I am not suggesting that lobby groups should not lobby members and senators, but I always treat with deep suspicion paragraphs at the end of letters and emails that say, `If you don't do this, we'll vote you out at the next election.' I guess that I have heard many colleagues say, `You'll just have to do that.' We will do what we should do in the national interest. If you do not adopt that view, then you should not be in this place, but I digress.

The amendments in the bill will outline the expansion of the current range of films exempt from classification, and this has been done to ensure the continued availability of specialist product on the Australian market which may be affected by the cost of classification services. The range of films that are exempt has been expanded to include current affairs, sporting, family, live performances, musical presentations, religious and hobby films, and I think that is an entirely sensible way to go. These additional categories of films to be exempt fall typically into the limited market appeal category. To preserve the integrity of the current classification scheme, the films exempted will lose that exemption if they fall outside the G and PG classification.

The financial impact on the film and video industry is expected to be minimal and, of course, that is a good result as well. The removal of legal uncertainties and procedural anomalies within the scheme should reduce costs to businesses as well as improve compliance levels. I think that we could all point to that as being a good outcome from this bill as well. Expansion of the range of films exempt from classification and the waiver of fees power will also reduce costs to business and ensure the continued availability of specialist product on the Australian market. The impact on the X-rated industry will not be great as it has the capacity to quickly access and, where necessary, adapt material to be submitted for classification—it will know what the rules are—to enable that classification to come within the guidelines of the proposed new X-rated category.

Another aspect of the proposed amendments relates to the social implications that such change will bring. There has been some concern expressed in Townsville and Thuringowa that such X-rated material may unduly influence our kids, for example. It might be fair to say that material portraying violence, sexual references and sex scenes does, or could, have a damaging effect on minors. It has been my view that children brought up in a balanced family life, with family values, will not be affected by this material. Sometimes I think that we parents think our kids are little angels; that they do not see or talk about these things among their colleagues. They do. But if they have a balanced view, this material will just be part of their normal day-to-day experiences, they will reject matters that are not appropriate and they will do that of their own volition without having government or parents direct them to do so. We should credit our kids with having the ability to screen or filter out what is and what is not appropriate.

It is proposed that the category will be scrutinised using tougher guidelines than apply to the current X-rated category. The new, more restrictive category will exclude material that is currently available under the X classification which censorship ministers have agreed should be proscribed. The expansion of the range of films exempt from classification will address some of the concerns expressed by the industry about the proposal to move to full cost recovery for the classification system.

I do not think I need to say any more on the bill. I believe it is supported by those on both sides of the parliament. There have already been some good contributions to the debate. I look forward to hearing the contribution by the member for Moreton. I ask the parliament to support the legislation.