Filter an example of Rudd's Whitlamesque stupidity: ISP chief
- — 06 August, 2010 13:18
Reactions to Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey's startling revelation last night that the Coalition would vote against Labor's mandatory internet filtering policy -- likely dooming it to fail -- continued to roll in this morning, including one from outspoken filter opponent and Exetel chief John Linton.
Linton -- who runs one of Australia's significant smaller ISPs -- has been a strident opponent of the filter right from the early days of the policy, describing it in a memorable commentary in November 2008 as Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's plan to "cleanse the Reich of anything he designates as undesirable so that the kinder can safely be indoctrinated in the preferred ways that he deems any citizen of the Fatherland should think and act"
Today in an emailed statement Linton said Hockey was simply stating the obvious yesterday -- "that the proposed internet filter would do nothing and was simply another example of Rudd's stupidity and his silly attempt to 'buy' Senator Fielding's Senate support".
"The fact that Rudd forced Conroy to persist so long," added Linton,"and Gillard has done the same, is one more demonstration that the Labor Government is a re-run of Whitlam's 'amateur night'."
Internode chief Simon Hackett described the situation as "amusing" in a comment posted online. "So we have the current government supporting the NBN (good) and the deceptively pointless filter (bad)," he said. "And we have the opposition opposing the NBN (bad) and also promising to kill the deceptively pointless filter (good)."
"What a great example of damned if you do, damned if you don’t, eh? Do you hate the filter more than you love the NBN? Tough call."
Other ISPs -- notably Telstra, Optus, Primus and iiNet -- have also been asked to comment on the Coalition move, but Telstra has declined to comment on the political situation, and the others have not yet responded.
However a number of other interested parties have commented on the situation, with responses ranging from jubilation on the part of anti-filter campaigners like the Greens and Electronic Frontiers Australia, and derision from the Australian Christian Lobby and the office of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.
“This announcement is incomprehensible on a number of levels”, said ACL managing director Jim Wallace. “Joe Hockey needs to explain why refused classification material hosted on overseas websites should be available, while RC material on Australian hosted sites is not,” said a spokesperson for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.
Comments
Liam
Fri 06/08/2010 - 13:49
Umm, Conroy, the reason RC material is on overseas hosted servers whilst it isn't in Australia is because the people who own those servers decided to put the RC content on them and are legally entiteled to do so since they're based overseas. The internet filter wouldn't change that. This guy's as thick as 2 short planks!
Michael
Fri 06/08/2010 - 14:55
So the filter is effectively dead. Assuming the Greens and Coalition combined have a majority of the Senate (which they should), and they stick to their word, the Coalition can kill this off even from Opposition.
Doesn't really make it a case of voting for "one or the other" (NBN or filter), when even if you vote for Labor the filter will be killed off in the Senate.
Too easy.
Kye
Fri 06/08/2010 - 14:58
Personally for me its a pretty easy decision.
NBN = something to make telstra look like a fluffy friendly Labrador. Telstra started as a government organisation. The NBN will destroy broadband competition and create an entity an order of magnitude more potent and powerful than telstra. Surely repeating the mistakes of telstra and expecting a different result is insanity.
Filter = Terrible.
Simple choice.
John
Fri 06/08/2010 - 14:59
Why do everyone keep touting 'Freedom of Speech' ??
We have no such right in Australia, nothing in our Bill of Rights (apart from Parlimentry Privilege) but you would expect the politicians to put in a backdoor for them.
michael
Fri 06/08/2010 - 15:34
John : you are right, that was another thing the ACL lobbied against, the bill of rights for australia.
the ACL are insignificant and i don't understand why they keep getting articles in the media for Internet Censorship, my guess would be because they are the only ones for it apart from the Labor government.
I like how the ACL and Conroy keep up the RC is only illegal content charade ... what a joke.
mutatedwombat
Fri 06/08/2010 - 15:51
@John: Yes, we have no such right in Australia, although I should point out that we don't have a "Bill of Rights", either.
We have a constitution, but it says nothing about human rights.
What we do have is convention, which is largely based on battles fought and won over the past several hundred years, both here and in Britain. Whatever freedoms we have are tied up in these conventions. Every so often someone tries to shift the boundaries, and a new convention is established.
(Remember the Australia Card?)
This is why we have to be eternally vigilant, and fight really hard for our freedoms.
Ray of Bris
Fri 06/08/2010 - 16:03
@Michael: If you have a problem with the ACL (no I'm not a part of it) go take it up in an appropriate forum. This soapbox is for the Filter and Rudd, or should I say, really it's Filter and Conroy, the latter who needs his head checked if he thinks it is in any way effective. If he is serious about countering things such as child pornography, he should be hiring more undercover police who have a PROVEN record in catching crims.
Jonathan
Fri 06/08/2010 - 16:11
I don't see how it is "damned if you do, damned if you don't.".
It seems clear to me:
If Labor get in then we will get the NBN, and the filter will not get passed as the Libs will block it (as will the greens).
Seems win win to me.
Peter
Fri 06/08/2010 - 17:16
I wouldnt be so sure that if Labour got back in that it would all be rosie apples. My guess is the Libs would read that as a reason for why they lost and change their possition. I'd feel a lot safer getting Conroy out of office first. Besides hes too much of an arrogant twat to keep on in his current possition. We need a minister who knows how IT works and doesnt bend over for the ACL.
Jonathan
Fri 06/08/2010 - 17:22
@ Peter: There is no way they would see their opposition to the filter as being the reason they lost, when such a large majority of the population is opposed to it.
If they then backflipped on their opposition to the filter once they lost, then we would see their true colours regarding the filter and know that they were just being deceitful to win over the IT crowd.
Jacob
Fri 06/08/2010 - 18:41
Voting greens, they like both. And they should be able to block either the NBN from being canned, or the filter.
Greg
Fri 06/08/2010 - 18:50
To be honest I no longer care whether or not the filter is brought in. If it eventually does get introduced it'll be because everyone failed to listen to the IT professionals who protested against it. Worst case for me: something gets blocked that shouldn't and I use an SSH tunnel to bypass the filter.
peterh_oz
Fri 06/08/2010 - 19:14
Will the election is easy now:
Vote 1 Greens, to block the filter AND build the NBN.
Preference Vote 2 Labor, to build the NBN (in case the Greens don't win in your area). Mke sure you vite 1 Greens ABOVE the line in the Senate, and their balance of power, plus the Libs, will block the filter. But having a Labor/Green majority in the Senate will not only block the filter (Labor won't hold the Senate outright) but it will also ensure the NBN is passed!
The Greens support the NBN, but not the sale of it (to create yet another privately owned monopoly) simply to balance the books early. Keep it, and collect the profits forever. Why should the profits of necessary infrastructure be in private hands (hello Water, Electricity, Tollways, Railways).
WIN-WIN. Thanks Joe Hockey - you've made my preference much easier now!
Bob
Fri 06/08/2010 - 19:39
Woohoo!!! Thank you Mr Hockey, Now I can vote for Labor and the NBN with out a filter.
Asmodai
Fri 06/08/2010 - 20:55
While I'm not in favour of the Libs, voting Labor back in sends them an easily misconstrued message that their filter has popular support.
If it comes down to a choice between the two, the party championing the filter will always be at the bottom of my scorecard. I can wait on taxpayer funded faster broadband, I will not sacrifice my right to exercise my right to choose not to break the law rather than have some creepy government git tell me what I can and can't access, particularly material that is not only legal to own but is in fact (for the most part) legal to sell in the ACT. Funny that, the pollies are allowed to buy their porn free but don't want the rest of the nation to have it...
If you think voting Labor is a good idea because a majority might split the difference, you are also ignoring other issues (such as Abbott's basic lack of voter appeal). The election hangs on more than just filtering and the NBN and while you certainly have the right to be a single issue voter, you are in a minority. Abbott's opposition to the NBN doesn't seem to stop their popularity rising, and Labors staunch support of the fitler (which hasn't even been election news until now as they've carefully hid it) didn't hurt them, leaks about Gillard did...
Jordan
Fri 06/08/2010 - 21:16
Does John Linton actually know what he's talking about? Cause I'm fairly sure that the filter is Stephen Conroy's own pet that Julia Gillard forced onto be backburner before this election so that she wouldn't have to deal with the issue when she's trying to win an election. Only Conroy and Hockey have mentioned the filter of late.
Kanook
Fri 06/08/2010 - 22:00
Im sorry but I think that Labor should be punished for trying to force a filter onto us. Rewarding them by voting them back into the Lower House is just plain silly.
As people have said here and everywhere on the net, I would rather my current internet setup and no Filter, than an NBN and a Filter. People have to wake up and see that this type of Censorship by the Govt would be expanded upon if it is allowed to come in, what use is an NBN if your Govt decides what you can and cannot do on it ?
Sou
Sat 07/08/2010 - 00:00
In my case it's easy. I've been told the NBN won't reach our town because we only have about 1,600 permanent residents (although the population is probably quadruple that most of the time because of weekenders and holiday makers).
In any case, I'm with those who prefer freedom of speech to fast internet. The fast internet can come any time with or without government. Once you give up freedoms and accept government censorship it won't be reversed by any government - pollies are too power-hungry. Don't trust one of them.
Conroy has to go - make sure all Victorians vote him last on the ballot. regardless of your political leanings.
Ronald E
Sat 07/08/2010 - 00:34
Will the filter affect anything of genuine value?
Is this twit Conroy going to use China's software to run HIS filter ?
Send the ALP a message on August 21.
Mark Newton
Sat 07/08/2010 - 11:50
Stephen Conroy says, “Joe Hockey needs to explain why refused classification material hosted on overseas websites should be available, while RC material on Australian hosted sites is not."
Actually, no. Stephen Conroy needs to explain why prohibited content is restricted on Australian websites when it's been available for over two decade without harm to Australian society on overseas websites.
What purpose is the Australian restriction serving, other than to impose a debilitating restriction on our local hosting industry? Is Labor in favour of global competitiveness or not?
- mark
Ian
Fri 06/08/2010 - 13:44
It is a bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't, but I'm afraid I place freedom of speech and free access to information as a higher priority than even better broadband. We can keep campaigning for better infrastructure, but we can't risk losing freedoms that generations have fought to win for us.
Also, who cares what the ACL think?? They are entitled to their opinion, just don't try forcing it on me and mine.