Filter 'no' vote guaranteed: Greens

Filter 'no' vote guaranteed: Greens

Summary: The Australian Greens Party today vowed that it would vote against Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's plans to filter the internet of "refused classification" material, calling on the Opposition to publicly state how it would vote when "push comes to shove".

SHARE:

The Australian Greens Party today vowed that it would vote against Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's plans to filter the internet of "refused classification" material, calling on the Opposition to publicly state how it would vote when "push comes to shove".

"I have ... held back from declaring the Greens' voting intentions on this issue in the faint hope that by the time we saw legislation the minister might have accommodated at least some of the concerns that have been put to him by a huge range of stakeholders," Greens communications spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam said in parliament today.

"But, on the back of the Four Corners piece the other night, it is pretty obvious that this is a false hope — so let me remove that ambiguity once and for all. If the government presents its mandatory internet censorship scheme to the parliament in the form that the minister has been describing to us, the Australian Greens will vote against it."

Greens MP Lee Rhiannon had said in March that her colleagues would vote against the filter.

Senator Ludlam's full speech is available on the Australian Greens website.

Topics: Censorship, Broadband, Browser, Government AU

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

11 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Does the filter work? Is the filter able to be circumvented? Is the filter in its current form a complete and utter waste of money and time? Will the filter degrade network performance?

    With the answer to all of the above being yes I am sure that the Libs and Nats already plan to vote down the filter legislation in the upper house. I don't know where Family First and the Independent Senator stands on the issue though.
    Mel Sommersberg
  • Another reason why we should all vote Green.

    Seriously i don't understand why people don't vote Green.

    1. no backflip on the ETF
    2. No accepting of corporate or developer donations
    3. Major electoral reform
    4. Significant regulation into the finance industry that has run riot in this ponzi global fraud scheme that we call the stock market.
    5. Major investments into non-fossil based energy systems.
    6. major improvements on land management.
    7. and last but not least they are against Conroy's Madness (copyright chugs 2010).
    chugs1
  • I'm in
    nissy-2f939
  • I somehow doubt the Libs would block the filter as it's about the only item that 'Anti-everything Labour Proposes' Abbott has remained silent upon.
    Seems I'll be voting for the Greens 1st time ever.
    grump3
  • If you do vote greens please watch your preference!!!!!

    no point voting greens if they just preference Labor and Labor get your vote anyway.
    Le_Chimp
  • Speaking as a person who would have been happy to vote Green until recently, I was dismayed when the Greens endorsed Clive Hamilton as a representative of their party. Hamilton is arguably the chief architect of the current disgusting push for censorship, and I won't be voting for him, nor any party so stupid as to consort with him.

    If the Greens want my vote, they need to kick Hamilton out of their party and go on record as to not directing any preference votes to the ALP. I am not about to give a proxy vote to Labour.
    cfuse
  • @cfuse, Greens candidate Clive Hamilton may not just "arguably" be the chief architect of the current push to impose secret government censorship. Apparently he has loudly and proudly proclaimed that it was his concept that has been taken up by Conboy.

    The Greens have not been able to bring themselves to commit outright to voting against the odious filter, but their comments have been more opposed to it than any other party. Voting for them is therefore attractive, subject to two issues that need to be sorted first.

    Will they actually commit to voting against government censorship of the Net?; and will a vote for the Greens flow straight through to Conboy & Co anyway because of locked in preferences? A clear and unequivocal Yes and No to these questions would put a lot of minds at rest.
    gnome-8be8a
  • @gnome Um sorry, but the Australian Democrats have been far more consistent in their position on the filter than the Greens. Ludlam's own language indicates they are anything but firm on the issue - willing to vote for it if Conroy's makes some concessions. They still don't have a policy on it, haven't elevated it to an issue the leader speaks on, and still have Clive as a valued member of their party and likely candidate.
    kathoc-f1f48
  • Well, looks like the Greens have won my vote for the Senate.
    meski.oz
  • You could always make your own preferences by filling out all the boxes below the line.
    maxwarren-a40f0
  • Clive Hamilton, by himself, is unable to change Greens policy. Unlike the Libs and Labor, policy development/changes must be made by the majority of members at the grass roots level and then ratified. It takes sometime to do this and thus they have stable policies that have integrity, unlike John Howard's "non-core promises", or the Tony Abbott's "only believe what I say at certain times".
    pilotyoda