Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Luke
07 Mar, 2008

Michael Atkinson's speech cut off in parliament

PALGN News | Cut off by "raucous interjections".
The R rating for Australian games is up for debate again and was bought up in parliament today. Michael Atkinson, the South Australian Attorney-General presented his case in parliament today on why their should be no R18+ classification for games, but was cut off mid speech.

According to News.com.au, Atkinson began to describe five games that have been banned in Australia. As he was describing the banned title NARC "he was cut off by raucous interjections and returned to his seat".

News.com.au was also able to get a full copy of Mr Atkinson's speech, including the final part where he was cut off. We have reproduced it here for your convenience, thanks again to News.com.au for the transcript.

Quote:

The Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia has repeatedly put to attorneys-general that there ought to be an R18+ classification for computer games.

Unlike films, for which there are R18+ and X18+ classifications, the highest classification for computer games that depict, express or otherwise deal with sex, violence or coarse language in such a manner as to be unsuitable for viewing or playing by persons under 15 are classified as MA15+.

Computer games that exceed the criteria needed for an MA15+ classification must be refused classification and cannot be sold, hired, demonstrated or advertised in Australia. Nevertheless, thousands of games are available to computer game buyers and only a few are completely banned under this system

I have consistently opposed an R18+ classification for computer games. I am concerned about the harm of high-impact (particularly violent) computer games to children. Games may pose a far greater problem than other media – particularly films – because their interactive nature could exacerbate their impact. The risk of interactivity on players of computer games with highly violent content is increased aggressive behaviour.

I do not want children to be able to get their hands on R18+ games easily. I understand that the lack of an R18+ classification denies some adults the chance to play some games, however, the need to keep potentially harmful material away from children is far more important

Proponents for the classification say the latest technology allows gaming platforms and computers to be programmed to allow parental locks. Today’s children are far more technologically savvy than their parents. It’s laughable to suggest that they couldn’t find ways around parental locks if R18+ games were in the home.

I have mentioned that, despite there being thousands of computer games available to consumers, only a handful are banned. I want to give some examples of games refused classification in Australia because I’m certain that fair-minded people would not want the kind of content in them to be available to children.

Blitz: The League was banned in January 2007. It’s an American Football game in which players prepare teams and play through a season. It was banned because in the course of the game, the player may use illegal performance-enhancing drugs for the members of his or her team. The player can also use fake urine samples to avoid positive drug tests

Reservoir Dogs was banned in June 2006. This game is based on the Reservoir Dogs movie and players are participants in a bank robbery. They can blow the heads off hostages and police as well as execute hostages at point blank range with a gunshot to the head. They can also torture hostages by pistol whipping the side of the head, burn the eyes of a hostage with a cigar until they scream and die, or cut the fingers off hostages. There are blood bursts as the victims scream in pain.

50 Cent: Bulletproof was banned in November 2005. The game’s central character is the rap star, 50 Cent, and he seeks revenge for the killing of his former cellmate. It was banned because the killing in the game was prolonged and took place in close up and slow motion. It included a lot of on-screen blood splatter when the killing was done with knives. Just to show that the current system does work, a censored version of the game was released later with an MA15+ classification.

Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure was banned in February 2006. In this game, players make names for themselves using graffiti. They join gangs and compete with rival gangs and the police force. This game was banned because it promotes breaking the law by vandalising public buildings with graffiti. Worse, the central character acquires his knowledge of graffiti tips, techniques and styles from real graffiti vandals who pass on those details. It actually instructs players on how to become graffiti vandals

Narc was banned in April 2005. In this game, players try to defeat an underground drug trafficking and terrorist organisation. Nevertheless, the game contains frequent drug use. Players can choose to take illegal drugs including heroin, speed, LSD, marijuana and ecstasy and those drugs provide the player with benefits in progressing through the game. For example, when a player takes an ecstasy tablet

At this point Mr Atkinson was interrupted and returned to his seat. The following is the rest of his speech as provided by his office

... opponents will stop attacking and allow the player's character to escape. Similarly, taking speed allows the player's character to run faster and catch opponents.

I contest any idea that it is necessary for games to include material of this kind and that a game is more interesting to an adult because it contains extreme violence, explicit sexual material, instruction in crime or characters using illicit drugs. I remain firmly opposed to changing the classifications of computer games to allow an R-rating for games with such content

This is a carefully considered position I have held for six years and other attorneys-general around Australia may now be coming to the same view. There are not adequate safeguards that can properly protect our children from those disturbing scenes and I know how computer-literate they are. Like other parents in Australia, I want to try to protect children from being able to access computer-generated pornography and violence.

I have not been persuaded by arguments for an R18+ classification for computer games and I will continue to oppose it.


PALGN has requested an interview with Michael Atkinson, but unfortunately he has not returned our calls.

Related Content

Easy Mode Volume 2.3
02 Jun, 2007 On importing.
NHL 2K7 Review
06 Nov, 2006 What's cooler than being cool? Ice cold.
Easy Mode #26
26 May, 2006 Back to level the playing field.
33 Comments
1 year ago
Seriously though, when has there ever been a time when those monkeys in parliament don't cut in with their "raucous interjections". It's always the same pathetic display. Someone comes up to speak, the monkeys start shouting their cacophonous drivel icon_rolleyes.gif

I'm only OK with it this time because Mr Atkinson is a giant douche, well larger than usual anyway.
1 year ago
Do we know the reason he was 'cut off'? I can't imagine that the Liberal opposition are fans of violent & offensive video games ...

Just out of interest, here are the Meta Scores of the games refused classification:

Blitz (69), Reservoir Dogs (50), 50 Cent: Bulletproof (50), Getting Up (70), Narc (50).

Maybe we'll actually miss a good one some day ....
1 year ago
Ninja Gaiden II? We already missed out on Sigma for the Xbox Originals service.

Don't forget titles like GTA III were originally banned too.
1 year ago
Luke wrote
Ninja Gaiden II? We already missed out on Sigma for the Xbox Originals service.
Ninja Gaiden Black, not Sigma but yeah it still sucks it wasn't included in the last batch of releases.
1 year ago
hope this is a good sign,

I bet if mothers were informed that these "MA" games in Australia are actually often rated R18 in most other countries, they might just support the R rating.
1 year ago
Hopefully he gets a raucous injection to put us out of our misery.
1 year ago
There have been 63 games since 1970 that have been refused classification (RC) by the OFLC. Of these there are a couple of decent games which have usually been 'sanitised' and then been re-classified as MA15+ - thus not entirely banned.

Check out the list here

Interestingly the majority of these are sleazy PC games, with Victoria Police listed as the applicant.
1 year ago
Eh, as much as I appreciate having his speech here like that... it kind of feels dirty to be linking back to (and thanking) news.com.au
Thats like thanking and linking to ACA, or TT. Or the Weekly World News... (okay, that's a bit of a stretch... but it gets the point across)

Hacks, the lot of 'em. On par with Atkinson, really... which is somewhat fitting I guess.

I don't mean to sound ingrateful or anything, just really dislike them.
1 year ago
This is confusing. The linked article isn't clear whether the interjections were from the opposition or the public. If the former, it's very unusual and won't be widely reported as it's illegal to film or photograph anyone but sanctioned speeches in parliament. If it's the latter, I don't know why it's being reported by news.com.au, because as Capoiera correctly points out, that kind of thing happens innumerable times on any given day of parliament.

Edit: Also, does anyone else see the irony in having a speech that is essentially pro censorship being cut off?
1 year ago
EDITED:
It appears I am a little more conservative in my views than I thought, and I may well be wrong. Hence I'm going to rethink my opinion on the matter before posting.

I was of the impression that negs were for posts that were out of line or offensive, and I didn't feel that my posts were. I was evidently wrong, and I apologise.

I'm not kidding by the way. Sometimes when we are met with opposition to our views we have to stand back and think a bit deeper about it. I guess this is one of those times to me.

What I do know, is this is certainly not worth making enemies over.
1 year ago
if you do ever get an audience with Michael Atkinson, ask him if he's so concerned about minors getting restricted material, why he isn't lobbying for tighter controls on ID checks for DVD sales, and cinema sales. surely it's not that difficult to get ID checks at cashiers?

personally, i agree with the theory, but i think the focus is wrong. it just seems that they're taking the easy way out of the issue. if the hard work (ie: restricting restricted content to those applicable) could be done satisfactorily, then perhaps he might change his mind.
1 year ago
Well, I felt this new information deserved a new email to Mr Atkinson (I still have not received anything, either by email or by post, from Mr Atkinson or his office, since they sent that bulk email out asking for postal addresses). I decided it would at least be somewhat more sensible to send this to the same secretary who asked for the postal addresses, in the hopes that it is more likely to be passed along. So here it is:

Quote
Ms Moore,

It is my understanding that in a recent sitting of the South Australian government, Mr Atkinson repeated his position on R18+ video games, explaining why these games are unacceptable to be released in Australia.

As I explained in my previous email, the case that he makes for banning R18+ games in Australia is just as valid if applied to alcohol. Recent news has come out indicating that massive numbers of children and teens have been binge drinking, thus indicating that this issue is relevant.

As such, I would like to know the timing of the press conference in which Mr Atkinson will be announcing his opinion that alcohol should be banned from Australia, so that we can keep this destructive product from the children of Australia, who are clearly savvy enough to obtain alcohol in sufficient amounts to binge drink regularly. Based on Mr Atkinson's logic for R18+ video games, alcohol should be banned from Australia, and thus kept from the hands of adults, in order to protect the children.


Of course, I am not stupid; I am fully aware that it would be political suicide for Mr Atkinson to announce his desire to ban alcohol. Indeed, my expectation at this stage is for you to not even read this email.

Mr Atkinson's ignorance of technology is the basis that he uses for why R18+ games are not to be allowed in Australia, according to his speech. He claims that the tech-savvy children of Australia would easily be able to bypass the parental locking mechanisms on modern gaming consoles, which clearly demonstrates his ignorance on the issue - take it from a tech-savvy adult, the parental locking mechanisms are not easily broken, and any parent who is doing their job should also be keeping an eye on their children, to ensure that they are not playing inappropriate games.

As such, I will pose a new set of questions for Mr Atkinson - does he honestly believe that Australia should be a so-called Nanny State? Is it really the job of the government to do the job that is traditionally considered to be the job of the parent? Is it truly acceptable for the rights and freedoms of law-abiding adults to be stripped away because other adults fail in their duty of care to their offspring?

Mr Atkinson claims that the children of today are particularly tech-savvy, and this is why parents cannot do their job; this is quite clearly yet another case of Mr Atkinson's ignorance. Most children are not nearly tech-savvy enough to bypass common protections placed on various products, and the few that are sufficiently savvy are almost certain to be able to get their hands on these products whether they are banned or not. As such, Mr Atkinson's so-called protection of children by banning R18+ games is either complete ignorance of the fact that the banning does nothing whatsoever towards protecting children, or political cowardice on the part of the AG.

Mr Atkinson's exact words were "It’s laughable to suggest that they couldn’t find ways around parental locks if R18+ games were in the home." This is a good demonstration of the ignorance I mentioned - Mr Atkinson hasn't actually examined the parental locks; instead, he has simply assumed that parental locks are easily-broken, even though he, himself, claims to not be tech-savvy.

Mr Atkinson mentioned 5 games that had been banned in Australia. I would like to mention another game; this game was given an MA15+ rating, as it was not deemed bad enough to justify a ban. The game involved working for the mafia, killing for money, picking up hookers, and, when caught breaking the law, escaping from the police, who you could also kill. The game is Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, and not only this game, but others in its series, which are all similar in terms of content, were given MA15+ ratings.

If an R18+ rating were introduced, there is little doubt that these games would be given such a rating. Since an R18+ rating is restricted far more strongly than an MA15+ rating, this means that games that should have been very hard for a child to get are instead practically handed to them. As a result, Mr Atkinson's position is actually counter-productive; instead of keeping inappropriate content out of children's hands, it is leaving such content wide open, for easy access. Sure, a few games a year get banned, but far more games that should get an R18+ rating are instead given MA15+ ratings and released to Australia for easy access by children.

Mr Atkinson also claims that "The risk of interactivity on players of computer games with highly violent content is increased aggressive behaviour." This is a claim that occasionally comes up in relation to video games; it is also a claim that has been debunked repeatedly, and in spite of numerous studies of the topic, not one of these studies has found even a weak connection between violent video games and violent behaviour. The interactivity of video games has actually been proven in studies to *decrease* the resulting effects on the child - R18+ movies are actually worse for children than any R18+ video game would be, because of this.


Although the majority, by far, of adult gamers are not at all interested in actually purchasing those titles that are currently banned, they are still calling for the introduction of R18+ ratings. The Australian video game industry is also calling for it, even though not one of the Australian companies are interested in making games that would currently be banned. These two facts should indicate to yourself and to Mr Atkinson that perhaps deeper examination of the issue is in order, and that perhaps the *right* thing to do should be more important than the politically safe thing to do.


I currently do not expect any reasonable response to this email; much as with the previous one, I expect a bulk email response asking for postal addresses (which I have already provided), and not a single word of actual response to either my email, or to the issues contained therein. It has been more than a week since I provided my postal address, and I have not received anything, either by email or by post, on the issue, and meanwhile, Mr Atkinson has repeated his absurd claims and has not even acknowledged the points that I and others have attempted to bring to his attention via our emails.

And so, I expect Mr Atkinson to do as I previously stated, and either announce his position for banning alcohol, or choose to allow R18+ games in Australia. Anything other than this is merely ignorance, arrogance, political opportunism, and hypocrisy.

If I receive a bulk response to this email, I will be taking my emails and my story to the news providers, as this issue is too important to allow Mr Atkinson to hide or dismiss out of hand.

Respectfully,

<name and age removed>, of <location removed>, Queensland
1 year ago
EDITED:
It appears I am a little more conservative in my views than I thought, and I may well be wrong. Hence I'm going to rethink my opinion on the matter before posting.

I was of the impression that negs were for posts that were out of line or offensive, and I didn't feel that my posts were. I was evidently wrong, and I apologise.

I'm not kidding by the way. Sometimes when we are met with opposition to our views we have to stand back and think a bit deeper about it. I guess this is one of those times to me.

What I do know, is this is certainly not worth making enemies over.
1 year ago
I negged and i dont think i need to explain my position again as i have stated it numerous times and obviously i and gtpod disagree with the position expressed in your first post. Restricted material importation is illegal unless you are granted permission by the OFLC to import it through customs. I don't need to be part of an unnecessarily illegal activity. Also i'm sure you are well aware of most people's stance on this issue in these forums and yet you are surprised by a neg.

Quote
Maybe you're taking the issue a little waaay too seriously.
No i don't think so, if it were not waaay too serious, why offer your opinion at all.

Quote
The main reason I hate Mr Atkinson's campaign is that there's twenty billion other things he could do that are far more useful. Well... maybe he lacks the intelligence. But still
i don't get it, he has been asked by parliament to cast his vote on proposed legislation, on one hand you are saying you agree with his stance the next he's wasting his time and possibly has no intelligence, strange argument....
1 year ago
Quote
----Aside-----
I'm also a little very annoyed that someone had the audacity to neg my post without even giving a reason why. Very mature. icon_mad.gif

Feel free to disagree with me, but Maybe you're taking the issue a little waaay too seriously.
I never took the issue seriously, if I did I'd have posted in here already. The one massive flaw in your entire argument is that a system without an 18 rating doesn't allow adults to decide for themselves what games they and their children are allowed to play; instead, the government decides what the people are allowed to be entertained by. Nanny states aren't for everyone, me included, hence I disagree, hence I neg.
1 year ago
I agree that many games which are MA15+ are pushed into that category simply cause there is no R rating. If a parent sees a MA15+ rating and is truly unaware of the state of the games industry (i.e. there is no R Rating, so MA is as bad as it gets) they would be more willing to purchase the game than if it was R Rated. EVERYONE knows R Rating means extreme content.

Its also funny to mention that Australia is the only developed country in the world that does not have an adult rating for its video games. Does our government think so poorly of us?
1 year ago
Rude son of a, at least he could return you calls. Probaby thinks he's to high an mighty to speak to PALGN.
1 year ago
I believe Australia is heading down a path of church and state becoming one. I for one do not want this to happen but there is nothing that i can do about it. Just think people once they get rid of the idea of R+ for games whats next? What else will the soccer mums, religious and people with to much time on there hands go after next! This is what i fear the most icon_sad.gif.
1 year ago
Those with too much time on their hands should play more video games.

Maybe they hate the gaming industry because they got gipped by Bible Adventures for NES all those years ago.
1 year ago
Man I used to have huge problems with violence and aggression, but thanks to excessivly violent video games to relieve my aggression I'm pretty much a pacifist now, I don't think I've been angry more than once is the last 5 years, and havn't been violent for alot longer.
1 year ago
Itachi wrote
I believe Australia is heading down a path of church and state becoming one.
Hardly, I don't see how you can state this with the main argument being the accessibility to minors, nanny state as was stated before is applicable but religious innuendoes?

I do like how his supposed statement doesn't even touch on the methods that such "computer savvy minors" will most probably be undertaking with banned games, we're constantly bombarded by "downloading a movie is like stealing IT BAD YO!" yet when it's obvious that the alternative option contains people illegally obtaining copies via downloading we get silence. Such an awesome alternative that he seems happy with the current arrangement of people actually breaking the law instead of regulating it, if he promptly blocks it I wonder if those who import the banned games without knowledge that they are could list him as an accomplice. icon_razz.gif
1 year ago
Lord Haart wrote
There is a 100% chance kids will end up with such games. Much better to ban them - I mean let's be honest, how hard is it to bring a computer game into the country by importing it/being sent it by a friend?

If someone really wants such a game they will get it. The clincher is that most people who are capable of getting a game imported are over 18, so the current system seems to work.
I'm not sure you've fully thought this through. How is it an argument to ban R18+ games, exactly? First you say that there is a 100% chance that children will get their hands on banned games (bit of a stretch, but lets run with it) and mention importing - then go on to rightly say that the only people able to import these games is adults anyway. Right, so children can't import the games - that leaves piracy. If they're going to download the game, then having a restriction on the sales of said games is pretty much moot. Why go to the trouble of trying to bluff their way to a sale, and then actually forking out the $90 odd for the game when they can simply download it?

Given this scenario, the only people being restricted legal access to this content is Adults. You know, that group that should be able to buy it.

Quote
I really don't understand why this is an issue. I don't know anyone who it affects, I mean, even the people for having 18+ games are so grossed out by their content that they wouldn't play them themselves.
What?! You cannot be serious!
I mean, first off you're making the completely incorrect assumption that all games given the R18+ rating are disturbingly graphic, then you're adding to that by assuming that no-one could want to play any of them. I can guarantee that both points are wrong.

Quote
I do agree that we have some MA15+ games which are too extreme, but you can hardly claim the solution is to let games which are even MORE extreme into the market. icon_confused.gif Similarily, irresponsible parenting is one of the biggest issues in western society, but there seems to be only two methods of overcoming it - for the parents to stop the negative influences they bear upon their children, or for someone to remove those influences for them. Many parents simply don't have the knowledge neccesary to choose proper games for their children - the fact that kids are playing MA games is proof of that. It's naive to think the same wouldn't happen with R games.
You went pretty quickly from "Freedom of speech is great, until it reaches a point where it is destroying the freedom of others."
to (and I'm paraphrasing here) "people can't be trusted to make the right choices, so they shouldn't be allowed to make these choices themselves."

So which is it? Should people not be allowed the choice, or is it bad to restrict freedoms like that? You can't have it both ways I'm afraid.
I'm 100% against that kind of thinking - if a choice has to be made about how I live my life then I want to be the one to make it, thank you very much, and anyone who thinks otherwise can go joust.

Quote
The only difference between having an R rating an not having one, is that the only viable means of obtaining such games is removed from small children.
Incorrect! 'Small Children' wouldn't stand a chance of being able to obtain the game legally, and if they're going to obtain it illegally then it isn't going to make a lick of difference - as I've already said.

Quote
I'm a bit sick of this debate, because few people seem to actually think about the practical outcomes of having R18 games. People may walk around touting ideas of "free speech", but the fact is, there are very few cases this applies to, and they are quite minor relative to the noise people make about it.
Oh, I see. Having backwards and practically broken restrictions that only serve to restrict legal and fair use to the very audience that the material is made for is fine and dandy because it isn't a 'big issue'. That is ridiculous! If you're going to tell me that I shouldn't be able to buy a game classified R when I can walk down to the shops and buy a handful of movies with the same rating, and much higher impact violence and themes, then at least provide an actual argument instead of just saying that it isn't an issue worthy of resolving!
1 year ago
Yeah your right Fly, Nanny state i should of said. I just see there blocking R+ system and with the internet filter system coming icon_sad.gif. What else are they going to censor.
1 year ago
"Just to show that the current system does work, a censored version of the game was released later with an MA15+ classification."

love this part of the speech, the part that shows how completly WRONG he is, since the current state of affairs is making what should be R rated games MA instead, thus available to children.

I don't care much at all about the games that have been banned so far since they've mostly been trash anyway, problem now is that games that should be for adults only are getting slight censoring and released to kids. Really no kid should be playing GTA or Saints Row or Scarface etc.
Add Comment
Like this news?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/ck

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
Currently Popular on PALGN
Bioshock 2 Review
Welcome back to Rapture...
Win 1 of 10 Bioshock 2 packs
Includes free stuffs!
PALGN Weekly Releases - 08/02/10
Christmas in February?
Dante's Inferno Review
Is it Divine, or unwittingly Comedic?