Mr REPACHOLI (Hunter) (11:16):

I rise to contribute to the debate on the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Industry Self-Classification and Other Measures) Bill 2023. We have all seen those colourful icons when watching a movie, as well as the voice overs at the very start of a TV program saying: 'This program is rated PG. Parental guidance is not recommended for viewers under the age of 15.' Some would say this is iconic, but it serves a real and useful purpose. These classifications are not just for movies and TV but are also used for video games and publications, such as magazines. Ratings can range from G, which is suitable for everyone, all the way up to MA, which is suitable for those aged 15-plus and which children under the age of 15 may not legally watch, buy or hire unless they are in the company of a parent or an adult guardian, and R is restricted to adults only.

They say you can't judge a book by its cover. That is also the case for film and television, and even video games. You can never really know what you're buying until you watch it or play it. That is why these classifications are so important, especially for families. As a father of two young girls I know how useful these classifications are, because they always try to get to watch something they shouldn't be. I would not want to expose my daughters to something they should not be exposed to because I didn't realise it contained things that were inappropriate. Think of the movie Ted, for example. It's not my type of movie, but it's an example of a movie with a misleading name. Imagine watching Ted with the family and thinking it was a movie about a teddy bear! In reality, the movie is rated MA15-plus, being suitable for an audience aged 15 and over. Because of our classification system, families know that this movie is not on the cards for a family movie night—even though my girls will still try to make that happen!

The National Classification Scheme has served us well since it was introduced in 1995, but it has remained largely unchanged since it was first introduced. We all know that the world is very different now to the world in 1995. Our kids are growing up in a world that in many ways hardly resembles what the world was almost 30 years ago. As a result, our classification standards are falling behind the times. They have not kept up with the pace of Australians' access to media content, particularly the rapid growth in online content. For the scheme to act effectively as a guide for Australians to choose what content they view, it needs to be trusted and reliable. But when the system is seen as being outdated, it is difficult to trust. This threatens the integrity of the scheme and the confidence Australians have in this source of information.

There have been multiple reviews into the scheme. The Australian Law Reform Commission produced a report in 2012 and also in 2020 based on reviews of Australian classification regulation. Both made findings that there are aspects of the scheme that are no longer fit for purpose. There are also strong calls from industry making the same claims. It is clear that reform of this scheme is needed and long overdue.

The needs of the modern Australian family are completely different in 2023 than they were even just over a decade ago. Our children are more easily exposed to all sorts of content all over the internet without any kind of regulation. This is dangerous and could harm our young people. That's why the government is committed to reforming the scheme to ensure that it meets the needs of modern Australian families. This bill will introduce our government's first stage of reforms to a national classification scheme. There is more content available to Australians than ever before, and there are even more content providers, providing this content. This is largely driven by the huge amount of content that can be found online. With these large numbers of content providers today, especially online content providers, it can be difficult to comply with classification regulations, and the time frames and costs involved have an impact on this. This bill will address this issue, specifically by expanding options for industry to self-classify content to make it easier for content providers, particularly online content providers, to comply with classification regulations and reduce classification time frames and costs for their business. There is also a whole range of cultural content which is absolutely fine for people of any age to be exposed to but does not need to be classified. This bill expands exemptions from classification for low-risk cultural content, including films in languages other than England that would be classified at G or PG level being distributed through public libraries, as well as content that is displayed by approved cultural institutions as part of routine exhibitions and events. This makes the system fairer and more streamlined by making a commonsense change that does not harm anyone at all.

Before 1995, some content was regulated under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. Right now there is a requirement that this content be reclassified in line with the current national classification scheme but, more often than not, this is just doing the same job twice. This bill will improve the efficiency of the classification system by removing the requirement to reclassify material that has already been classified under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992.

We have a lot of work to do in this area, and these changes are just stage 1 of our broader two-stage classification reform process. This staged approach is very significant and it is well thought-out. The changes in the first stage are important as they are needed to help set the scheme on the right path forward. That is why we have prioritised this stage and implemented it immediately. This first stage will also open the door for further changes, meaning that the government is able to work with key stakeholders to develop more comprehensive second-stage reforms. These reforms will have focus on clarifying the purpose of the scheme. A scheme which is lacking clarity in its purpose will not achieve any objective at all, so it's very important that everyone is clear on what the scheme seeks to achieve. It's also important that the scheme actually achieves what it was intended to achieve. It needs to be relevant to the modern age and incorporate factors that were not as major when it was first introduced, like the internet and the online space. Stage 2 will ensure this by establishing fit-for-purpose regulatory and governance arrangements.

This next point is perhaps the most important. The scheme must be guided by what the community deems to be appropriate. If it is there to guide the community, it must reflect the values and thoughts of the community, otherwise it's irrelevant and will provide false guidance. This is why we will make sure that classification criteria is aligned with and responsive to evolving community standards and expectations. There is a whole range of issues that have real impacts on our community today which may not have been topics of sensitivity in the past, or their impact may have been overlooked. These kinds of issues may be expressed in content, but other classification standards fail to advise the community that they may be triggering content. This shows how the guidelines have failed to move with the times and how they have failed to achieve their objective of properly providing advice on the type of content people are choosing to watch in order to avoid this content causing harm to them or their families.

It is great to see that earlier this year the Classification Board updated consumer advice to make sure Australians are better informed about whether a film contains potentially triggering content such as bullying, suicide and self-harm, as well as disturbing content related to horror or blood and gore. In 2022, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications and the Arts surveyed 2,000 Australians on their values and their understanding and use of classification information. This showed that Australians want more information about what they are watching to avoid any unwanted and possibly confronting surprises.

Our world and our country have changed significantly, and they are continuing to change. The amount of content available and the content type that is available, the ease of accessibility of such content, and the standards and expectations of a community are all elements which are constantly changing in the ever-evolving world we live in now. Our classification framework needs to keep up with all of these factors in order to properly serve its purpose. This bill will create a contemporary classification framework that will serve all Australians into the future. I commend this bill to the House.