Australian senator implies fellow senator is for child porn.

[Mr Flibble]

Last week one senator from Canberra essentially made the astounding accusation that another senator for Canberra wanted to "opt into child porn". The antagonistic parties are former Daramalarn student and current minister for communications, Senator Stephen Conroy and current ACT senator, Kate Lundy, both members of the Australian Labor Party.

For a long time, Lundy has been quietly arguing for the Labor Party to modify its internet filter policy to allow Australians to choose to opt out or opt in. When pressed on Lundy's position by a journalist last Tuesday, who asked: "Do you have any indication from Julia Gillard about how she would consider any opt-out or opt-in amendments to the filter that Senator Lundy has been —"

Conroy cut him off. "We have election commitment that we will deliver on."

The journalist persisted: "What's your personal view of the opt-out and opt-in provisions?"

Conroy snapped: "I'm not into opting in to child porn." And Kate Lundy is? That is one insidious rebuke for a member of his own party, of any party, and an elected senator of the Australian Federal Parliament.

As soon as Kevin Rudd lost his position, an impromptu campaign was ignited online calling for Conroy to be dumped and replaced with our very own Kate. The newly installed Prime Minister was deaf to the calls, instead opting for a minimalist cabinet reshuffle. The online public reaction was again massive.

The websites of the ABC, the Australian newspaper and Fairfax publications all lead with headlines declaring Rudd had been left out of the reshuffle. Yet the comment sections attached to those articles immediately filled with calls for Conroy's head. Journalists and their readers seemed to completely disconnect on topics. Few posters were interested in the fate of the ex-Prime Minister — they were howling for the communications minister's blood and asking why they did not get it.

Kate Lundy has managed to generate enormous goodwill amongst the online community by getting out and engaging with them over many years. One of her staffers, Pia Waugh, is also held in high regard.

Late last year when working for the Department of Health and Ageing, I was dispatched to a National Press Club conference on Web 2.0 initiatives in government. One of the attendees sat down at my empty table and struck up a conversation between speakers. They were not wearing a name badge. We spoke at length about IT issues, the influence of games on other media, the proposed internet filter and I was impressed by their level of knowledge and understanding of the many issues involved.

"Excuse me," I asked, halfway through the chat, recognition slowly dawning, "You're not Kate Lundy are you?"

Of course she was and she left enough of an impression on me then to blow her trumpet now. Which makes Conroy's outburst seem even more bizarre.

We are all used to the minister for communications accusing anyone opposed to his internet filter of being a child pornographer. It often seems to be the only argument in his arsenal.

While Gillard may have opted for a minimalist reshuffle and Conroy may feel his membership of a right wing faction (who helped install the new Prime Minister) makes him safe, that outburst suggests otherwise.

Going to the extremes of rubbishing a colleague's proposal with base name calling suggests Conroy is either rattled or supremely confident. Either way, accusing the likes of Kate Alexandra Lundy, senator for the Australian Capital Territory, of wanting to "opt into child porn" is simply and absolutely ridiculous.

This article first appeared in The Canberra Times on Monday, 5 July 2010 and is republished here with the newspaper's permission.

Conroy's behaviour on this issue has been totally unprofessional, implying a fellow Labor senator is in favour of child porn is extremely low. It is crap like this which prevents Australia from having sensible debates about important political issues. I actually was so annoyed this time that I wrote to my local MP (Kate Ellis) and one of my state senators (Nick Xenophon) about the matter. Kate Ellis just replied with a list of the government's policy, totally ignoring that I was complaining about how Conroy was behaving not so much the policy, Nick Xenophon on the other hand replied saying that he is opposed to the filter.

[Lusankya]

What's telling to me is that both senators are Labor party members. Party infighting like this doesn't usually happen in public, especially with the Labor Party. Between this and the sudden leadership change, Labor's acting like an messed opposition party.

Between this and the Liberal Party's factional tension, I wouldn't be surprised if one party or the other split in the next fifteen years.

[mr friendly guy]

What's telling to me is that both senators are Labor party members. Party infighting like this doesn't usually happen in public, especially with the Labor Party. Between this and the sudden leadership change, Labor's acting like an messed opposition party.

Between this and the Liberal Party's factional tension, I wouldn't be surprised if one party or the other split in the next fifteen years.

Hey, maybe Labor can split into Right and Left, while the Liberals split into a right wing and more right wing faction aka the climate change deniers, racist and homophobic cunts (eg the Wilson Tuckeys, Tony Abbotts, Ross Lightfoot, <insert random WA liberal>, John Brogdens, John Howard etc).

Now that would be interesting.

[Stofsk]

What's telling to me is that both senators are Labor party members. Party infighting like this doesn't usually happen in public, especially with the Labor Party. Between this and the sudden leadership change, Labor's acting like an messed opposition party.

Between this and the Liberal Party's factional tension, I wouldn't be surprised if one party or the other split in the next fifteen years.

Hey, maybe Labor can split into Right and Left, while the Liberals split into a right wing and more right wing faction aka the climate change deniers, racist and homophobic cunts (eg the Wilson Tuckeys, Tony Abbotts, Ross Lightfoot, <insert random WA liberal>, John Brogdens, John Howard etc).

Now that would be interesting.

I would rather the liberals split into the moderate small l liberals and the right winger jeezus freaks. At least Turnbull wanted to see action done on climate change (although Krudd's policies were stupid).

[Stofsk]

Conroy puts internet filter on backburner

Updated 34 minutes ago
Filter delayed: Stephen Conroy.

Filter delayed: Stephen Conroy. (AAP: Alan Porritt, file photo)

The Federal Government has deferred the introduction of its mandatory internet filtering program.

Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy says the filter will not be put in place until an independent review can be carried out into what content would be banned.

The review, which Senator Conroy says is likely to take about a year, will look at what makes up "refused classification" rated content.

Senator Conroy says internet service providers Telstra, Optus and Primus have agreed to block websites known to contain child pornography in the meantime.

"I applaud these industry members for taking this stance, for stepping up to the plate, in recognition that there is some content that is not acceptable in a civil society," he said.

"This approach is consistent with what is happening around the world."

The Government announced the filter two years ago as part of its cyber safety program to protect children from pornography and offensive material. Last year it ran tests on the system.

Senator Conroy had intended to introduce the legislation in the first half of this year, but deferred it to later in 2010.

He says the refused classification rating, according to the national classification scheme, includes child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and material that advocates a terrorist act.

"Under Australia's existing classification regulations this material is not available in newsagencies; it is not on library shelves. You cannot watch it on a DVD or at the cinema and it is not shown on television," Senator Conroy said.

"Under laws passed by the previous government, refused classification material is not available on Australian hosted websites.

"Unfortunately where this content is hosted overseas nothing can be done to remove it."

Some of the grey areas of internet censorship include images of crimes taking place, graffiti or stencil art, and what some people would refer to as sexual fetishes.

The plan has been criticised by internet users who claim it will slow download speeds and lead to unwarranted censorship.

Senator Conroy has not yet announced who will conduct the independent review.

SingTel Optus' head of corporate and government affairs, Maha Crishnapillai, says the Attorney-General should decide what should be on the refused classification list.

But he says Optus expects transparency on how the blocked URLs come to be on the list.

"The problem we have is international sites and so the only way we can deal with that is to block those and I suspect all of our customers want us to block child pornography sites," he said.

"One of the reasons we have said we want to step up and offer this voluntarily is that we think there are ways that the industry [can] cooperate to do that without the need for the mandatory legislation. However... if legislation is required we will quite happily work with Government on that."

Aunty Julia must have noticed this isn't a popular issue with voters, so Labor has tried to defuse it before it blows up into an election issue. Abbott would probably get a lot of votes for him if he came out right now strongly opposed to a internet filter. But that won't happen.

Man how much money has this goddamn policy spent already? How much more? Why couldn't that money be given to police to investigate crimes?

[Stark]

I think its very much more than several million; they've had many trial runs etc. All wasted because everyone they ever asked said it was stupid.

[Stofsk]

I wish someone with a bit of dash would ask him how much money this has cost the taxpayer already and how many pedophiles could have been investigated or child porn rings could have been smashed with the same equivalent amount of money being allocated towards law enforcement.

[Johonebesus]

While the internet filter thing seems like a big issue, it's weird to see anybody making a big deal out of this Conroy's comments. For a politician, particularly a conservative, to make such a statement would be downright mundane in the U.S. Is the writer quoted in the OP being a bit shrill, or is political discourse U.S. really that far below the standard in the civilized world?

[Lusankya]

Conroy's statements are pretty extreme for Australia. While there's plenty of mudslinging, they tend not to go around accusing each other of paedophilioa.

What's even bigger, however, is that the comments were directed at a fellow Labor Party member. Most countries have stronger party discipline than America; Australian party discipline is pretty strong by world standards; and in the Labor Party, party discipline is so strong that MPs can get kicked out of the caucus for crossing the floor during a vote. This is despite both Australian parties being polarised into Left and Right factions (for a given definition of 'Left‘ and "Right". Party disputes tend to be kept in the party room. in such an environment, this kind of friction between party members seen in public is pretty huge.

[mr friendly guy]

Conroy's statements are pretty extreme for Australia. While there's plenty of mudslinging, they tend not to go around accusing each other of paedophilioa.
.

I actually recalled the Liberals (I think it was Abbott) accusing high court judge Michael Kirby to using government funded vehicles cruising around for male prostitutes, which was totally without evidence and directed against the judge because he was gay. It seems Conroy has stooped as low as some Liberals.

[Liberty]

I would rather the liberals split into the moderate small l liberals and the right winger jeezus freaks. At least Turnbull wanted to see action done on climate change (although Krudd's policies were stupid).

Wait - the right winger Jesus freaks are in the party titled "liberal"? That strikes me as odd. But then, I don't know diddly about Australian politics.

[mr friendly guy]

I would rather the liberals split into the moderate small l liberals and the right winger jeezus freaks. At least Turnbull wanted to see action done on climate change (although Krudd's policies were stupid).

Wait - the right winger Jesus freaks are in the party titled "liberal"? That strikes me as odd. But then, I don't know diddly about Australian politics.

They are liberal when it comes to economics, ie big taxes on big companies raking billions are bad mkay. They are however conservative when it comes to social issues, ie anti-abortionists, against gay marriage, and some of them are blatantly racist.

[Teebs]

Wait - the right winger Jesus freaks are in the party titled "liberal"? That strikes me as odd. But then, I don't know diddly about Australian politics.

Outside America Liberal can often mean economically liberal as in against state interference in the economy. Most of the European liberal parties seem to be pretty right wing economically (although often socially liberal too). I'd assume that the Australian liberals just forgot about the social bit.

[Stofsk]

I would rather the liberals split into the moderate small l liberals and the right winger jeezus freaks. At least Turnbull wanted to see action done on climate change (although Krudd's policies were stupid).

Wait - the right winger Jesus freaks are in the party titled "liberal"? That strikes me as odd. But then, I don't know diddly about Australian politics.

The Liberal Party of Australia has branched away from its roots a fair bit. Classically it's all about economic liberalism, freer markets and freer trade and so on. It's only been relatively recently that it's become something of a socially right organisation, which I blame Howard for unreservedly.

Our political parties are more factionalised than your parties are, but there's also more cohesion in it whereas American politics is more individualistic (i.e. just because you have a Democrat Senator or Congressman doesn't mean he's going to vote for something Obama wants made into law; while here, unless a conscience vote is called most people will vote by party lines, and if they cross the floor they can be punished for it). By factions, I mean each party seems to have a number of sub-groups. The Liberal party is more vague in this sense, because the factions seem to fall into which state the particular group of ministers come from. The Labor party is factionalised between left wing social democrats and right wing trade unions - to be broad as possible.

Kevin Rudd was Prime Minister up until a few weeks ago, when he was ousted by the right wing faction of the Labor party. Julia Gillard has since been elevated into the position, and she's made a few decisions that ultimately I think are bad for the country - like caving in to the mining industry within days of becoming PM, not reshuffling her cabinet into dropping Steven Conroy like the idiot that he is, and demonising asylum seekers and restarting the previous government's Pacific Solution Mark 2 (and yes, if you can actually believe it was referred to as a 'Solution' you might be as outraged as I am about it). She also has the stigma of only getting her job by stabbing her boss in the back.

[Ford Prefect]

It's fairly obvious that she's playing it 'safe', so that the ALP wins the next election, as well as appeasing the right faction. This is probably why Conroy is unfortuantely so safe, because he is deep, deep right and Gillard can't really afford to antagonise those top power brokers. I imagine that, if she gets elected and thus has the apropriate mandate to be Prime Minister, that things would be different, but I can't vote for a party based on 'maybes'.

Wait - the right winger Jesus freaks are in the party titled "liberal"? That strikes me as odd. But then, I don't know diddly about Australian politics.

There are right wing Jesus freaks in both our major parties. The 'dry' Liberal faction has produced a number of religious politicians who are also very powerful, given the structure of how the Liberal Party is run. The current opposition leader is Tony Abbot, who is notorious for his religious beliefs, and their most powerful Senator at the moment is Eric Abettz who, while not as notorious as Abbot, is staunchly religious and has commented in the past that religion needs a stronger presence in our schools.

[JBG]

And a left wing jesus freak leading the Greens.

Back to thread, Conroy is rattled and has shown that he can't take the pressure. He seems to actually believe in his filter and cannot handle the torrent of opposition and effective lack of allies - Hillsong etc is not going to vote Labour just because of this issue.

So why don't federal Labour shed/significantly amend this piece of expensive ineffective/counter productive BS as they have before with other big ticket items? The mind boggles.

[Ford Prefect]

And a left wing jesus freak leading the Greens.

Did you just call Bob Brown a 'Jesus freak'?

[weemadando]

And a left wing jesus freak leading the Greens.

Did you just call Bob Brown a 'Jesus freak'?

I think he did. I'm guessing that the closest Bob Brown has ever been to Jesus was when he jay-walked right in front of me on Collins St and I had to jam on the brakes to avoid cleaning him up.

Indeed, he is a self-described "Lapsed Presbyterian", which I would hardly consider "Jesus Freak" territory.

[Molyneux]

While the internet filter thing seems like a big issue, it's weird to see anybody making a big deal out of this Conroy's comments. For a politician, particularly a conservative, to make such a statement would be downright mundane in the U.S. Is the writer quoted in the OP being a bit shrill, or is political discourse U.S. really that far below the standard in the civilized world?

Even in the United States, flat-out saying that your opponent is in favor of child porn is a little bit...out there. Especially a member of your own party.

[pj1351]

Even in the United States, flat-out saying that your opponent is in favor of child porn is a little bit...out there. Especially a member of your own party.

As the article mentions, accusing anyone who voices opposition to the filter as being pro-child pornography is pretty much the only argument Conroy can come up with. By now, that single straw he is clutching is likely so deeply indoctrinated in his own mind, he probably wouldn't hesitate to say the same thing if it was actually the PM who suggested an opt-in/opt-out system.

[JBG]

And a left wing jesus freak leading the Greens.

Did you just call Bob Brown a 'Jesus freak'?

I think he did. I'm guessing that the closest Bob Brown has ever been to Jesus was when he jay-walked right in front of me on Collins St and I had to jam on the brakes to avoid cleaning him up.

Indeed, he is a self-described "Lapsed Presbyterian", which I would hardly consider "Jesus Freak" territory.

Given the lack of beard, sandals, idiot grin and accoustic guitar, "Jesus Freak" was a little strong. Notwithstanding that he is, by his own admission, a devout Christian. Is there a problem with that? We can be thankful that, generally, our political and PS environment is adult enough that we don't have a problem with religious affiliation, marital status, no's of kids or overt sexual preference etc. The members of the five teams that report to me present quite a variety!

It just occurred to me, it was Heffernan not Abbot who made those scurrilous accusations against Michael Kirby. He should have had his arse handed to him on a plate for that, at the very least.

[Ford Prefect]

Are you deliberately being stupid? Eric Abetz has been quoted as saying that we need religion in schools, and almost everything that Abbott does is informed by his beliefs (and I'd hedge bets that this is Conroy's motivation, given how pally he is with Krudd). That's the sort of context we're referring to here: just believing in God doesn't merit mentioning.

PS. 'lapsed' does not mean 'devout'.