Has the Government shelved the net filter too?

Pete says:

08:40am | 02/05/10

Why is Tony Abbott lost in action on this issue? The rule in boxing is never stick a featherweight in the ring with a lightweight - someone is bound to get hurt!

And if the Libs grow some balls and fight Rudd on this this issue, with Turnbull as leader I will vote for them.

David says:

05:00pm | 01/05/10

Sadly punchdrunk your idea of what may constitute ‘terrorist’ may differ from the government’s. Besides, Conroy wasn’t suggesting filtering terrorist websites, just material which is refused classification (not necessarily illegal by definition).

Terrorist websites, along with known paedophilia sites are monitored by the federal police anyway and accessing such sites, unless you take immense precautions, is going to land you on a watch list until they can gather evidence against you.

None of this is applicable to the government’s plan. Dropping the mandatory filter of secret websites is essentially a smart move. It was unworkable and ineffective (too easily circumvented). If people want to restrict the access their own children have then software such as the filter you downloaded is available.

Petr says:

09:02pm | 02/05/10

Are you for real?  a filter will not stop any determined hacker ever.
  Teach your children well and watch them at least some times.

L. says:

04:10pm | 01/05/10

“he hasn’t failed “Mums and Dads” in the process.”

Of course he has…he took away the free home PC filter years ago and replaced it with NOTHING…and actually reduced the AFP funding for the anti-child porn police.

David says:

05:08pm | 01/05/10

I agree with you Jeff. My concern is the Liberals haven’t used strong enough language against the filter. They were sceptical about the proposed filter to actually achieve the stated goals and be effective however they did not take a firm stand against this form of censorship (except Joe Hockey).

I suspect the insipid language from the Liberals was an attempt to avoid alienating their strong conservative Christian support (groups like the Australian Christian Lobby have campaigned rather hard for this kind of censorship and certainly garned substantial time from Conroy). This allowed them be unsupportive of the government’s policy but maintain a morally righteous position.

The Nationals on the other hand have been overly responsive to the government’s rhetoric of ‘if you’re not for the filter you’re for paedophilia and beastiality’. Evidenced by the disturbing comments from Barnaby Joyce on Q&A a few weeks ago, he seemed to think he was perfectly qualified to judge what all Australians should and shouldn’t access online.

Sadly the Greens are the only party who have demonstrated a consistent scepticism and criticism of the filter. While labor slide further to the right they open the door fro the Greens to become less extreme left, this will cost Labor votes this election.

BigTedd says:

11:13am | 06/05/10

The Diff is about 18 million people !!

Macon Paine says:

02:29pm | 02/05/10

“It’s more concerning, surely, that your party has indicated that they’ll ditch the NBN.”
Red Herring.

“Why not explain your reasons for that one?”
Argument by question.

Back on topic Perse. Do you support the Govs mandatory internet filter?

persephone says:

05:22pm | 02/05/10

You see, macon, I think Mary Jo is the one using a red herring here, trying to divert attention from her leader’s statement about ditching the NBN - a far bigger issue than the internet filter.

I’m not fussed about the filter, or very interested in it. It won’t change my life one way or another and I really don’t understand the fuss, despite asking various boffins to explain why it should upset me.

Apparently I should be upset because it’s useless, won’t work but will stop me looking at sites on the net that I don’t look at anyway.

I can’t understand how something which won’t work will stop me doing anything I want, but apparently I should be scared anyway.

At that point in the conversation I’m usually flooded with a spray of tech speak which I don’t understand.

Pre warning: I’m not interested. That’s why I haven’t said much on the topic. I’m not very likely to respond to posts on it, either.

Mark says:

09:37am | 03/05/10

Well why spend so much money on it? It is a nanny state idea at best, a way to censor free speech at worst.

Good thing it is gone. But again illustrates how gutless and deceitful this administration is.

Oh and the NBN. Explanantion? Sure.

A $43billion (well they are guessing because it was not costed) piece of infrastructure should not proceed on the basis of a few notes scratched on the back of an envolope on a plane.

We would have already had a perfectly good wimax network at a tiny fraction of the cost. Don’t believe it would work?

Ask Internode about its success in the far north or regional SA. As the Spanish. Ask the Americans.

The head of the damn thing said it will not deleiver a commercial and was forced to try and spin his way out.

It will make the batt scheme and school rorting of open plan sheds look like loose change in the long run.

Now that should scare you.

And how will we pay for it. Oh I dunno. Lets guess and say Robin Hood the mining industry. No one likes a profit maker anyway.

Rant, Rot and Ruin says:

12:03pm | 06/05/10

persephone, if you’re not upset by your government spending 44 million dollars on a national child sexual abuse cover-up machine, what DOES upset you?

Although apparently it’s been downgraded to 28 million dollars. Maybe that’s a better deal?

LC says:

09:11pm | 03/05/10

G, you say that like it’s a bad thing.

I’m pretty sure they said they’re going to get the legislation through parliament at the end of the month. But even if this is the case, Conroy has probably shelfed it for the lead-up to the election under Rudd’s advise, because a.) it’s unpopularity and the resulting voter backlash; hopefully by doing this they think they’ll simply…forget, b.) all the negative publicity has finally made the mainstream media, and more people are finding out about it. If they win the next election, they’ll probably return to pushing it through.

But at the next election, would you trust him with this a second time with your freedoms and taxes? I wouldn’t, and neither would I trust Abbott. Australia’s best chance of tossing this idea by the wayside once and for all would be voting in the Greens or another minor party. Time for a REAL alternative in government.