Senate discusses status of R18+ computer games classification consultation paper
The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia
The Senate
8 February 2010
Classification Review Board
Senator Feeney: I want to ask you some questions concerning classification of computer games. I note on 14 December last year the Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O’Connor, released a consultation paper to discuss the notion of whether there should be R18+ classification for computer games. From the submissions already received, have you been able to identify the main issues that are being ventilated through that discussion paper?
Mr D McDonald: That consultation process is ongoing, as your question implied. The collating of those responses is the responsibility of the department and it is my understanding they have begun to do so. There a very large number of responses.
Senator Feeney: Have you undertaken any kind of review or assessment of the submissions received to date?
Mr D McDonald: No, we will do it when the process is complete. But, in any case, the result of that consultation will be information for the government and for the state and territory governments. It is not a matter for the board itself. The board does not have a view about R18+ classification for games. That is a matter for legislators.
Senator Feeney: So you are not intending to make a submission?
Mr D McDonald: No.
Senator Feeney: The consultation period ends at the end of February. Is that correct?
Mr D McDonald: That is correct.
Senator Feeney: Could I ask the department some questions pertaining to this consultation paper. Are you in any position at all to tell us about the submissions received to date?
Mr Yates: I will ask Ms Helen Daniels, Assistant Secretary, Copyright and Classification Policy Branch, who has some information on that.
Ms Daniels: As of 1 February, we received 6239 submissions: 5465 have been by email, 447 by fax and 327 by post.
Senator Feeney: That total number of submissions is obviously an impressive, but it is not unknown that you will receive a lot of submissions in similar or precisely the same terms, particularly those you have received by email. Are you in any position to give us a sense of how many of those submissions might be characterised as substantive? Do you have any internal classification system for identifying how many of those submissions might be more than a page?
Ms Daniels: The discussion paper encouraged people to respond by a template - and of course we will accept and look seriously at submissions that do not use the template. A lot of those received so far have used the template, and that includes list of questions with a range of answers in them. So far the department has processed, for want of a better word, about 1100 of those. They have been using the template so that makes the processing a little easier.
Senator Barnett: So 1100 used the template?
Ms Daniels: Have been processed by the department out of the 6000 so far.
Senator Barnett: How many used the template?
Ms Daniels: Can I take that on notice?
Senator Barnett: Sure.
Ms Daniels: I will give the answer for the ones received to date.
Senator Feeney: Is the department in any position now to provide us with advice about what the main issues are?
Ms Daniels: The majority received so far are tending to support having an R18+ classification for computer games, but, as I said, we have only processed about 20 per cent. Until the consultation process is finished, it is difficult to make generalisations. But of those to date that we have looked at that is certainly the position.
Senator Feeney: When you say that the majority support the creation of such a classification, would you say it is the overwhelming majority? Can you give us an indication?
Ms Daniels: I would say the overwhelming majority. As at 28 January, 11 of the 1084 processed submissions opposed an R18+ classification for computer games.
Senator Feeney: Of those you have processed so far, you say the overwhelming majority support the classification. Can you give us any idea of what the top issues might be, what the top drivers might be, for that opinion being put forward?
Ms Daniels: Consistency across other media, particularly DVDs, would be one and the fact that a lot of adults are gamers.
Senator Feeney: That is all I have on R18+.
Senator Barnett: Of the 20 per cent that you have assessed to date, you are saying that an overwhelming majority support the R18+ classification?
Ms Daniels: Yes, that is to date.
Senator Barnett: Of the ones you have looked at are they mostly email or a variety of email and post?
Ms Daniels: They are mainly email because that is the way the majority have come in.
Senator Barnett: Of the 5465 by email what proportion - and you have indicated you will take this on notice - are the template version?
Ms Daniels: A very high proportion, but I would prefer to take that on notice to give you the correct figure.
Senator Barnett: That is fine. In the template version there are asterisks if you want to nominate your gender, age and gaming habits. I am not suggesting a preconceived view by the department, but is there a tendency to push submitters into a certain answer, because there must be a little bit of pressure if you are putting on gender, age, gaming habits and other personal questions. The issue of privacy is also of concern. Can you tell us about your response to the privacy issues in particular?
Senator Feeney: Perhaps you might tell us what information you are seeking to ascertain from respondents’ gaming habits. Senator Barnett is creating a mystique around that terminology which it does not deserve.
Ms Daniels: For those that who decide to answer those questions on what the department is seeking, we are hoping to get at a more complete picture so that we can advise Ministers about the situation in relation to R+ rating. The Commonwealth does not have a position on whether there should be an R+ rating category for games or not. The discussion paper is intended to be even-handed.
Senator Barnett: That is really the point. If people do not participate in gaming practices, how are you still encouraging them to make a submission? Are you still encouraging them to make a submission?
Ms Daniels: The department seeks submissions from everyone. I am imagining those who are putting in text based submissions will probably come in the next few weeks as opposed to the template version. Of course, we will be analysing all submissions received. We do not yet have many submissions from bodies representing particular sectors, for example. Those submissions are yet to come in.
Senator Wong: When Senator Barnett is referring to ‘gaming habits’, is this the question which says, ‘Do you play computer or video games, yes or no’? Is that what you mean by ‘gaming habits’?
Senator Barnett: That is my understanding, yes.
Senator Wong: And, ‘How frequently do you play? How long do you play in an average session’?
Senator Barnett: That is right. There are a lot of people who have views on this - and Mr Wilkins, you are looking at me quizzically- who do not play computer games but are fully aware of the impact of R-rated computer games. I hope you understand the thought behind it.
Senator Wong: Absolutely. I was just a little confused as to the non sequitur in the question which suggests that, because the department has the question ‘Do you play computer or video games, yes or no’, that that somehow is skewing the questionnaire or the submission.
Senator Barnett: I am not saying that is skewing the questionnaire. I am saying that you are setting up a system whereby you have answers from people who do not participate in gaming and those who do participate in gaining. That is correct, is it not?
Senator Wong: It says, ‘Yes or no?’
Ms Daniels: That is correct, but they are both equally valid and they are answers we will advise the Minister of.
Senator Barnett: You have said in your discussion paper, ‘Please use the submission template attached to this paper.’ You have an optional 250 words, but there is no encouragement to use as much length and time as they wish. It just seems you want the formulaic responses set out in the department’s discussion paper.
Ms Daniels: We knew it would be a large consultation process. We were trying, in an attempt to put some indicators to those who wanted to put in submissions. We wrote to various organisations to seek their views as well. So it is not just the template which will form part of the consultation process, but as a lot of individuals will be having a view on this issue, we thought a template was a sensible way to go.
Senator Barnett: But you have made mandatory answering those questions about gender, age and gaming habits, is that right?
Ms Daniels: In relation to mail and email, I do not know whether they are mandatory.
Senator Feeney: I do not think any component of the survey could be characterised as mandatory. No-one is obliged to fill in any part of it.
Senator Barnett: So you are not setting up a system where you are going to put more weight on certain answers. How will you assess the answers and the submissions when they come in? Will they all be equally weighted?
Ms Daniels: Yes, we have to give the Minister an analysis of all submissions received. So on those arguments for and against which were raised in the paper our intention would be to give the Minister and Ministers an assessment against each of them.
Senator Barnett: Right. How much weight are you going to be giving to the quantity of the responses, compared to a response from perhaps entities that might put in a more substantial submission? How will you assess it?
Ms Daniels: In our advice to the Minister, we would give both quantitative and qualitative advice on what was received.
Senator Barnett: I am advised that in the US the unmodified version of the game Left 4 Dead 2 was given a ‘mature’ rating - so, suitable for persons aged 17 and older - but was classified ‘refused classification’ in Australia. ‘Mature’ games in the US may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and strong language. What is the Minister’s intent in wanting to open the possibility of these extremely violent and sexually explicit interactive games being made available in Australia? That is a question for the Minister. I am happy for you to take it on notice, Minister.
Mr Wilkins: That is one for the Classification Board.
Senator Barnett: I am happy for the board to respond.
Mr D McDonald: Senator, I can give you the history of the classification of that game in Australia - this is Left 4 Dead 2. On 15 September 2009, the Classification Board classified an original, unedited version of Left 4 Dead 2 as RC - that is to say it was refused classification. In the board’s view, the game was unsuitable for a minor and contained violence that was more than strong in impact. The interactive nature of the game increased the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This, coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore, combined to create a playing impact that was considered high. The distributor applied for a review of this decision and, on 22 October 2009, the Classification Review Board met and also classified the game ‘RC’ - in other words, they refused classification. A modified version of the game was later submitted to the Classification Board and was classified MA15+, with consumer advice of ‘strong, bloody violence’.
Senator Barnett: All right. Thank you for that. Did the Minister want to respond to that question as to why the Minister or the government would want to make such a video game legal?
Senator Wong: I am not sure I have got any instructions or advice from the Minister about the view on that specific game. I would have to take that on notice. I am not sure I can agree with the assertion you have just made either.
Senator Barnett: I am happy for you to take it on notice.
Mr Wilkins: Can I just comment on that, Senator. The Classification Board classifies according to the existing law. The discussion paper is out there precisely because the government is trying to elicit what the public view is and it will then make some policy decisions on the basis of that. So that is the position. The government has not got a concluded view on this issue.
Home > Capital news > Senate discusses status of R18+ computer games classification consultation paper