Alston- what he really thinks of the EFA (Score 1)

Firstly, a note to non-Aussies:

• "Liberal" in Australian politics refers to the Right Wing political party, more or less equivalent to American Republicans.
• "Democrats" are a small party who "sit on the fence".
• "Labor" (ALP) are our Left/middle party.

Do not be fooled by the name "Liberals" . They are no more so than Benito Mussolini...

Now read on!

10/05/99 08:23 AM ZE10
Newswire

Government to revisit censorship bill
This article is located at http://www.newswire.com.au/9910/stompcs .htm

Roulla Yiacoumi

The Government has been forced to revisit its Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Act less than three months before it takes effect, following a motion passed by the Senate.

In a motion put forward on Thursday by ALP Senator Mark Bishop on behalf of Democrat Senator Natasha Stott Despoja, the Senate called on the government to:

• immediately address the concerns raised by industry and the community about the unworkable nature of the government's approach and the act in general;
• urgently revisit aspects of the act prior to its commencement on January 1, 2000;
• table a report on the effectiveness and consequences of the act in the Senate at six-month intervals from the date of the regulatory regime's implementation.

  The motion was passed 32 votes to 29. The architect of the act, Senator Richard Alston, said that although the Senate's motion is "fundamentally misconceived", he will be "delighted" to table reports every six months. The act promises to crack down on illegal and offensive material on the Internet and will come into effect on January 1, 2000. It will be administered by the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA).

  The Senate noted recent criticisms of the bill, such as: its inability to achieve the government's stated objectives, its adverse impact on emerging Australian Internet-related industries, and its effect of forcing Australian businesses offshore.

  Not having a bar of it

  In another stinging attack on the civil liberties group Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), which has been actively highlighting the act's deficiencies, Alston said the group has "no interest at all" in responsible Internet regulation. He described EFA as a group of "low-grade undergraduate political activists who thought that they could get themselves a bit of a run on free speech arguments."

  Alston said industry is not opposed to his bill, but that "maniacs -- these electronic frontiers outfits" are the ones "running around stirring up trouble" with the global village idiot tag. Once again, Alston cited Yahoo as being one major company which had endorsed his bill, but Newswire found this not to be the case (see story).

  In the latest debate in the Senate, Alston claimed the bill is supported by Lotus CEO Jeff Papows. He quoted Papows as saying "Industry has no issue with online content regulation. The industry endorses content regulation". A spokesperson for Lotus Australia said the matter would be referred to the US office for comment.

  Alston also said that a recent report, Building a Stronger Information Economy for Australia, by the National Australia Bank (NAB), Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu and law firm Arnold Bloch Leibler (see story) was "fundamentally wrong". The report contains errors because the three organisations had been "sucked in by a bit of media hype" and had not done their homework, Alston said. "I am pleased therefore that they subsequently put out a media release congratulating the government." A spokeperson for Deloitte said she is not aware of a second press release.

  Rejecting comments that current laws should be applied to criminal activity on the Net, Alston said "terrorist bomb recipes, paedophile lists and other things need to be dealt with specifically by Internet regulation."
  Fellow Liberal Senator Jeannie Ferris took offence at the legislation being described as an "inappropriate" form of censorship. "We accept that there is no 100% foolproof blocking technology on the Net, that nothing will ever be 100% effective in this area, and that there will be hundreds and maybe thousands of people who will tunnel their way past the filters," she said. "Simply because a law is not 100% effective, should we do nothing?"

  Senator Stott Despoja said the Australian Democrats do not advocate unsuitable material being made available to minors and that education of users is the most appropriate form of regulation. "The Democrats are not opposed to content control, but we are opposed to the heavy-handed and inappropriate way in which the government have pursued their policy on this issue," she said.
  Pointing to a United States Supreme Court finding which rejected a child protection argument for censoring the Net, Stott Despoja said the reason for this is the "clear understanding that the Internet cannot be censored for children without censoring it for everyone".

  The government's desire to control Net user behaviour has "quite eerie parallels with the content control mechanisms that have been adopted in some of the world's less free and democratic nations", Stott Despoja said, giving Malaysia and Singapore as examples.
  "These countries have discarded this kind of legislation," she said.

  Australia's emerging ecommerce industry is under threat by the current legislation, Stott Despoja said. Internet industries that employ large numbers of young Australians will be affected and Australia will no longer be an attractive place to invest in IT ventures.
  Stott Despoja said a number of legitimate online businesses had already moved their operations overseas and that Australia's potential as a regional financial centre may be jeopardised.