Public to decide on R18+ rating

PALGN News | After Ministers fail to agree.

As we reported earlier in the week, the Attorney General's meeting over whether Australia should have an R18+ rating for games was held earlier today. And the result? A stalemate. The issue will now go to a public consultation.

The exact details of the consultation are currently unknown, but it is expected that the results will be ready to present at the next meeting. According to reports, Victorian Deputy Premier and Attorney-General Rob Hulls pushed in favour of an R18+ rating but was predictably greeted with significant opposition from South Australia's Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, who continued to push his argument that he was protecting children from "harmful material". However, it is known that for the rating to be passed, there has to be agreement from all the states.

Ron Curry, CEO of the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA), was pleased with the result of the meeting. "Our belief is that good legislation comes from a reflection of community sentiment, so the process that the attorney-general is outlining gives us the opportunity to move this into the public forum for discussion," he said. "We understand that there is a robust legislative process that things must go through, so we have to work through that whole process."

When we find out exactly how the public will be consulted, PALGN will be sure to let you know if you can contribute in any way.

Related Content

Have your say on the R18+ classification
26 Mar, 2008 Before Friday's meeting.

SA Attorney-General to oppose R18+ classification
28 Feb, 2008 Give up hope.

R18+ rating for games being considered in Australia
25 Feb, 2008 We've heard this before.

PagePrevious 123 4 Next

77 Comments

pdarkness

3 years ago

I would just like to clarify the public submission means that basically lobby groups and community groups are invited to discuss the issue with relevent ministers. I'm very optimistic about the prospects of R18+ being established. While there will be those fringe christian and parent groups against the move, the interactive entertainment lobby groups have been very successful thus far; the fact that the issue has progressed to this stage is a credit to them. Also, it will be hard to dismiss the recent studies and polls of support for R18 and the average age of gamers; new studies might even be commissioned during this process.

So far, the QLD, VIC and ACT A-G's are in support of this rating, while the federal Home affairs minister was pretty neutral - but definitely not against it. I would assume that the NSW govt is generally supportive. The key is for the pro-R18 groups and public to keep hammering the core presuasive arguments (av. gamer age, fact that kids d/l banned games anyway, and that many MA games exceed its own guidelines and are suited to an R18).

In addition, if all the AG's (besides Atkinson) agree to this motion, Atkinson will be compelled to go along with it, as it would be (politically speaking) an unnecessary headache, and pretty improbable and rare for one AG to stand in the way of otherwise unanimous agreement (especially as they all belong to the same political party). Atkinson might ask for a few concessions in order to comply though (PSA on parental lock for consoles, selling R18+ games behind the counter etc.)

My opinion is that the next Standing Orders AG meeting at the end of the year will reccomend the R18+ implementation.

God speed!

Sin Ogaris

3 years ago

I'm going to wait these eggs out, this process can quite easily go either way so I'm not going to be screaming yay or nay. At least not yet.

NismoR34

3 years ago

Lord Halo Nerd wrote

I bet you we shall see a Current Affair or Today Tonight episode saying this will make all gamers muderous fiends.

Actually on that subject of how mainstream media shows are presenting it; Sunrise had a segment on it when it was first announced that it was going to be looked at in this meeting that took place yesterday and I have to say, the segment was handled brilliantly. Normally you would expect something that treats the issue as irrelevant because gaming is for kids or whatever the lame reasons are but yeah, the Sunrise segment was brilliant in that it was unbiased towards either way and asked the right sort of questions to the right sort of people. I almost felt like thanking them for treating it so well, it was that good.

I think one of the Current Affair shows (dunno which one) had a segment on it too which was also handled reasonably well but I can't remember.

Anyway I too am going to sit back and see how this all pans out. I hope it does become a success and if there is anyway I can help that notion, then I certainly will do so but otherwise I'm not going to anticipate an outcome so hastily. It will be an interesting outcome either way, though.

Fetidchimp

3 years ago

Kurupt wrote

I will be voting against this. Our country does not need an R18+ classification. It's only leading to trouble.

Now watch me get negged to the max.

would that be an admission of trolling, negged for trolling.

teashades

3 years ago

Daniel Golding wrote

Kurupt wrote

I will be voting against this.

You won't be voting for anything. It's almost absurdly unlikely that this will go to referendum, or even a plebiscite. It'll be focus groups, small sample polls, perhaps an open invitation to let your local MP know what you think.

That is right, there wont be a vote, but it is not unlikley that there will be a referendum, it is impossible. A national referendum can only happen when the constitution needs to be changed, and this would require no such change.

xloserfishx

3 years ago

Toastfarmer wrote

You're saying that this argument would convince Atkinson that games are being wrongly classified rather than to bring in an R18 classification. But Atkinson doesn't believe the system should be changed. He can't acknowledge one without the other, unless he's going to try and shift it even further into lunacy and claim that the games at the upper tier of MA15 that would ideally be R18 should also be banned, which simply won't happen because I'm sure he values his job.

Thats exactly right Toastfarmer. The two arguments are in no way mutually exclusive. In fact I think it is quite the opposite - one benefits the other, and we need to make Mr. Atkinson realise this if we hope to see this rating in Australia.

RooRage

3 years ago

Sin Ogaris wrote

I'm going to wait these eggs out, this process can quite easily go either way so I'm not going to be screaming yay or nay. At least not yet.

Sitting on a fence never won a war my friend.
Speak your mind, have a voice, spread your opinion...

If the vote turns out to be nay, it'll be disappointing but at least we fought tooth and nail for it.
If it's positive then the taste of victory with be ever so sweet...

What I can't understand is why there is this kind of voting system in place to begin with...
This democratic society believes in a majority vote to choose their Prime Minister etc, why does it have to be a complete 100% "yes" vote in order to pass this law?
However, I'll be the first to admit that my political knowledge is probably below average so any enlightenment would be appreciated!

bradc1988

3 years ago

I think a big problem with this is do us gamers have some sort of spokesperson or group of our own? Sure we are in numbers on the internet and such but we aren't really coming together as a whole to fight for this.

I know all the people who are against us, but who is on our side?!

A13x

3 years ago

Christian Lobby Group and Pornography Advocates, Eros Foundation, are both opposed to the decision.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23447566-5014239,00.html

news.com.au wrote

A spokesman for Eros said the foundation backed the ACL stance.

"We support the Australian Christian Lobby's point of view," the spokesman said tonight.

"Because we believe that there's too much violence out there and there are more pressing issues for the attorneys to consider such as the regulation of the X-rated film industry."

mipac

3 years ago

^ What are they NOT opposed to?

Itachi

3 years ago

Thats what Australian needs, more Christian Lobby Groups whooooo

*shoots self in head*

...

EDIT: See this is the problem with Australia right now is we have theses groups they would rather blame the item instead of parents. I find this won't change anytime soon, so basically lets just get use to stuff being banned. We are going to loose more and more freedoms so lets just accept this as the norm.

RooRage

3 years ago

Itachi wrote

EDIT: See this is the problem with Australia right now is we have theses groups they would rather blame the item instead of parents. I find this won't change anytime soon, so basically lets just get use to stuff being banned. We are going to loose more and more freedoms so lets just accept this as the norm.

Why do we have to "just accept this as the norm"?
Did women, Aboriginals in Australia, Blacks in America etc etc etc accept it when they weren't allowed to have rights or vote?
(There is a vast difference in the importance between these issues, however this is a strong comparison to drive my point.)

Why just sit back and let them control you?
Take a stand if you are truly passionate and do something about it!

Itachi

3 years ago

Roo Rage i would love to take a stand but who is going to be with me seriously. Trust me i would love to stand up and fight but i am 1 person and i very much doubt i can change anything. For example I heard there going to be banning cameras on beaches and i am like WTF????? Has Australia really come to this....

Please don't think i am anti Australia i love Australia i just think it's wrong. We are lossing more and more freedoms and people just don't give a damn. Another example putting warning labels on beer in Queensland. Thats **** right there imo. Seriously what can i do about it

So i just come to relise nothing and just go with the flow

RooRage

3 years ago

I know it's hard and we are a minority but if every one of us sends emails and submits votes on things like the public opinion polls, it will gradually mount up to make a difference.

Just look at Michael Atkinson. He's one man and stopping us all...

I'm with you to take a stand Itachi... That makes two of us at least... And I reckon we can scrounge up a for more here and there!

EDIT: have just checked out the news on the camera beach ban. Have been outta town for most of the week on business and haven't caught much on the news. Gotta admit that's pretty screwed up!

xloserfishx

3 years ago

Make that three Roo Rage... This is something that i will fight long and hard for!

Fly

3 years ago

RooRage wrote

EDIT: have just checked out the news on the camera beach ban. Have been outta town for most of the week on business and haven't caught much on the news. Gotta admit that's pretty screwed up!

It makes a twisted sense considering the dregs of humanity (really who'd bring a camera to a beach to do something productive with it) so that can't really be applied to this issue since the arguments really don't even make sense in their own right.

RooRage wrote

Just look at Michael Atkinson. He's one man and stopping us all...

He's one man with a government position that gives him the lawful right to determine what is and is not suited in various instances for Australia by election (to be a sitting member) and recognition by his peers (to be appointed). So yeah, he is but one man with many many supporters and we have what? The internet? Snide comment yes but I really don't see any other way to drill the point home, he's the legal advisor for the South Australian government, his current status makes any singular effort made on behalf of gamers moot, it's why all those emails got the regular "let's correspond!" messages.

Daniel Golding

3 years ago

teashades wrote

Well, yes-ish. There have been referenda that, if passed, would not have altered the constitution, such as the 1916 and 1917 Military Service and Conscription referenda. However, strictly speaking, these are referred to as plebiscites, so of course you are right. However, for all intents and purposes they are regarded as referenda.

B3NBO

3 years ago

I don't want it because i wont be able to get them for another 3 years! they'll make all games with the same amount of violence as currently rated MA15+ games R18+, I know it. If they rated Condemned now it would be R18+. So i will be voting NO. There is no need for a r rating the games that get R in america are usualy crap anyway and most are region free.

Itachi

3 years ago

Just so you know B3NBO you have to be 18 to vote roflmao.

EXH1LARATE

3 years ago

This will be pointless, we will just end up with more R rated games and less MA games but it wont affect purchase decisions. these days parents of teenagers do not monitor what video games their teenagers are playing, especially if they are 16-17 and they will end up playing the game irrespective of the rating. furthermore, by imposing restrictions on the purchase of R rated games, this will encourage minors to utilise illegal channels to obtain the game (such as piracy). the harder it is to acquire a game, the more teenagers will want to play it and hence the further they are willing to go to get it. finally, if all else fails they can purchase it online!

as can be seen, the system is flawed, these days ratings are not restrictions but recommendations.

Daniel Golding

3 years ago

EXH1LARATE wrote

the harder it is to acquire a game, the more teenagers will want to play it and hence the further they are willing to go to get it.

Going by this argument, teenagers should currently be going to extraordinary lengths to get games. Surely the thrill of importing a banned game outweighs the thrill of fooling a clerk into selling it to you in Big W?

xloserfishx

3 years ago

EXH1LARATE wrote

This may be true, but by enforcing the R18+ rating then parents will be responsible for allowing their children to play the more violent games, instead of passing the buck to the goverment or games companies

EXH1LARATE wrote

furthermore, by imposing restrictions on the purchase of R rated games, this will encourage minors to utilise illegal channels to obtain the game (such as piracy). the harder it is to acquire a game, the more teenagers will want to play it and hence the further they are willing to go to get it. finally, if all else fails they can purchase it online!

Again, as Daniel said, people are currently doing this anyway, because they can't get a hold of banned games. Allowing the games classification will most likely curb the rates of piracy (although with the amount of time we usually end up waiting for games I'm sure it won't make any difference

)

EXH1LARATE wrote

as can be seen, the system is flawed, these days ratings are not restrictions but recommendations.

This statement in itself is one of the most compelling arguments for having an R18+ rating - it will make the purchase of overly violent games restricted to adults, which is something the Christian lobbyists fail to realise.

renegadesx

3 years ago

What Mr Thompson... oops... I mean... Mr Atkinson fears are situations like this...

Yesterday I was in Big W, I saw a kid and his mother, his mother had all 5 PS2 GTA games in her hand in line. His concern is that there are alot of parents that are idiots.

And you know what? That is not our problem, that is not the govt's problem, that is not the retailers problem and that is not the publishers problem. The sticker said MA15+, end of story.

If a sticker said R18+ and that same mother bought it for her 10 year old kid and later complains about it? TOUGH! The sticker said 18+, she was the one that made it available to a kid, she is the one at fault

These "tech savy" young kids will just be downloading Soldier of Fortune: Payback on torrent sites anyways. Sorry but his reasoning no matter which way you look at it, is pointless and moot.

And the Christian Lobby? They would replace safe sex education with abstinence only programs if they had their way, you have to expect this sort of s**t from them. My question is why anybody pays any attention to them? Even the majority of Christians I know cant stand them.

Sin Ogaris

3 years ago

RooRage wrote

Sin Ogaris wrote

I'm going to wait these eggs out, this process can quite easily go either way so I'm not going to be screaming yay or nay. At least not yet.

Honestly? Nothing I have seen banned thus far in Australia would likely pass even if we had an R18+ rating (Perhaps that Dark Sector title, I haven't seen enough of it to comment). All the addition of an R rating will do is cause a number of titles which would otherwise get MA15+ to be lumped under R. For me, I don't care, I'm 22, I'll get the games if they're 15+ or 18+, the problem is so will children. Parents don't care about what their kids play, retailers don't care what kids play and gamers 18 years or older couldn't give two ****s about what kids play. The only people who are actually trying to do something to prevent impressionable kids from getting their hands on adult titles is the OFLC and the Government. Whether you agree with their methods or not (I personally think we'll be in the exact same situation now as we were with the 15+, games will still get banned and kids will still play adult titles) they're actually trying to do something.

As for the whole 100% thing, this public vote is an effort for the Government to bypass the ludicrous "all Attorney Generals must agree" bollocks that has been preventing this to pass. So in effect it is because we are a democracy that this could come to pass.

As to whether it actually will be a yes, I highly doubt it, I'm expecting this to come back as a no.

Qbert

3 years ago

Weather or not this makes a difference won't be seen untill after R18+ games are introduced. The one thing that it will do is establish gaming as a medium which people of all ages can apriciate and also give Australian's the freedom to choose weather they, or those in their care, play these games.

I'm glad they will listen to people's oppinions, even if it's only a small few. That's still better than one man making the decision with his peer's against him.

PagePrevious 123 4 Next

View as forum topic

Add Comment