Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Conroy Still Hell-Bent On Internet Filter

Posted by timothy on from the different-word-for-everything dept.

lukehopewell1 writes "In an interview for the ABC's PM program yesterday, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said that there would be no conscience vote on the Australian government's proposed mandatory internet filter. 'Conscience votes go to matters to do with life and death in the [Australian] Labor Party,' Conroy said. The minister said that the filter debate was not about censorship, rather it centred around refused classification material — an issue up for review in parliament. 'I'm not sure that the censorship claim stacks up. This is about classification systems. At the moment in Australia, there is no conscience vote on refused classification for movies, TV, DVDs or book stores,' the minister said. Conroy then called on the newly installed Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull to justify his position on the filter to families concerned about child pornography. 'According to the latest information I have here from the [Australian Communications and Media Authority], there are 430 child pornography sites on the [World Wide Web] ... that are accessible to anyone...[Malcolm Turnbull] has to explain to Australian families that he is prepared to do nothing about blocking access to those sites,' Conroy added." I hope some Australian and UK readers can help the rest of us understand the significance of conscience votes, though Wikipedia helps.

3 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Re:430? by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm not sure the "I was helping to slashdot it" defense will work out in court, bud.

    --
    THL phish sticks
  2. Re:Maybe you should have held a 'conscience vote' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Then we shall fight in the shade of a thousand suns.

  3. Re:big deal by deek · · Score: 3, Funny

    "[Malcolm Turnbull] has to explain to Australian families that he is prepared to do nothing about blocking access to those sites"

    I am outraged that Stephen Conroy knows about these child pornography websites, and apparently has not reported it to police. It is the police that can organise to shut these websites down, since they are illegal in every country that I know of.

    I can only assume that Stephen Conroy wants these websites kept available, to push his agenda of a compulsory internet filter. If I were of a conspiratorial persuasion, I may even secretly believe that Stephen Conroy had a hand in creating some of these websites. Now wouldn't that be a sensational news article.