Compare Party Responses

The Federal Government is not doing nearly enough to fight sex-slavery. Newspapers should not be allowed to accept advertisements from brothels which would be one good way of fighting it, and there should be mandatory jail for anyone involved in trafficking for the purpose.

 Like every other political party, the LDP opposes slavery. The central role of government in society is to protect our life and property and prevent violence and coercion. The LDP supports stronger punishment for victim crimes and more resources focused on preventing victim crimes (as opposed to policing victimless crimes). If anybody was being coerced into being a prostitute then the LDP certainly opposes that.

However, the LDP supports the free choice of people to voluntarily become a prostitute and the free choice of two people to enter into a voluntary contract regarding sex. The government should not tell us how to live or lives and they should not be regulating our sex lives.

Prostitution is demeaning to women and children. Legalised prostitution flies in the face of a number of United Nations conventions such as the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others; the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  CDP would see that these conventions find their application Australian law.

CDP would support the Commonwealth Government making use of its external affairs power to force the states to pass laws making all forms of prostitution illegal. This would extend to the prohibition of advertising of sexual services through newspapers. Local governments should  be empowered to prohibit  the operation of sexual services businesses. Appropriate laws about the gathering of evidence and the ability to search premises should  also be passed to  empower police to prosecute successfully. Finally, financial assistance should be extended to organisations offering escape and rehabilitation to prostitutes, and clients should be fined (as is the case in Sweden).

Without further consideration of this matter we are unable to offer more detailed comment.

The Australian Democrats believe that trafficking in persons is a modern-day form of slavery, threatening the dignity and security of millions of people throughout the world. The Democrats condemn any practice that serves to exploit women and children for economic purposes.

The Australian Democrats proposal for a complementary protection visa would provide more security and safety for the victims of trafficking. Access to the victim support program should also be widened to ensure that all victims, not just those able to assist police in a criminal investigation, receive access to health, residential and other support services.

 

Family First opposes prostitution. Family First wants the Parliament to investigate the existing Swedish laws which have reduced prostitution in Sweden. The Swedish model focuses on demand by penalising men who purchase women for sex. Women in prostitution are helped to leave the industry by government-funded exit programs. Family First will work on behalf of the women who are trapped in this industry, to protect them and their welfare.

The current 30 day bridging visa that is used (a 'BVF') is an interim measure. As stated above, if charges are laid a criminal justice stay certificate is able to be authorised to permit the individual to remain in Australia while the case progresses.

Labor recognises the difficulties in prosecuting the perpetrators of sex trafficking and the impact this crime has on the victims. There may well be cases where a longer period than the current 30 days would assist the visa holder in both assisting police and improving their own welfare. While it may be open to the Minister to re-issue a BVF, Labor would offer the Government bipartisan support in any general review of the length of BVF.

Labor believes any Government review would need to examine the appropriateness of the current level of support provided to all victims of trafficking, regardless of whether police are pursuing criminal charges against the perpetrators. Such a review should also consider the appropriateness of the current visa provisions available to the victims of sex trafficking.

Same as above.

Same as above.

The Coalition believes that the best way to protect victims of sex trafficking is to target those who seek to profit from this immoral activity. Australian Federal Policy and immigration officers, working with state policy, have made significant efforts to prevent trafficking of people. Identifying trafficked people and prosecution of traffickers remain a high priority.

This year, the Coalition Government passed specific legislation which creates criminal offences and enables the prosecution of employers of sex workers and those who provide facilities to sex workers (such as the owners of buildings to whom sex workers pay rent).

However, successfully prosecuting sex traffickers is difficult and the support of sex workers is critical in securing convictions.

Since 2003, an immigration officer has been based in Thailand, focused exclusively on sex trafficking. This financial year, the Coalition Government created similar dedicated positions in Beijing and Manila.

Marketing, advertising, music videos and a range of other media should be subject to censorship to protect the sexualisation of children.
 

Adults should be free to make their own decisions in life without the government (or any other group) interfering. When it comes to children, special provisions are necessary. Young children do not have the appropriate frame of mind to make important life decisions and so require the extra protection of a guardian. The LDP believes that the best guardian of a child’s welfare is that child’s parents.

There is little evidence to show that politicians and bureaucrats are more loving or wise than parents when it comes to raising children. The LDP would defend the rights of parents against those who want to nationalise our families.

Media, including television, films and the Internet, play an increasingly influential role in the formation of public opinion and taste. Children, including teenagers, are especially vulnerable to media influence. Aggressive and pornographic media is now making inroads into mainstream advertising and merchandising.

Society has a moral duty to limit what can be conveyed by the media in order to protect children and the whole community from what is harmful, especially violent and pornographic content.

CDP affirms also that standards for television and radio should take account of the potential that exists to influence children, and therefore reflect and support the values of Australian families.

CDP considers that the banning of tobacco advertising is an illustration of the recognised impact of TV and radio content on children's values, beliefs and behaviour. Self regulation by commercial interests and commercial television networks does not work.

Legislation need to be considered that will prohibit the use of children in the marketing of  clothing or themes that are sexually suggestive. Legislation must be passed to ensure that commercial interests are made subservient to the interests of children.



CDP believes that the R18+ classification should exclude any implied depictions of sex with
children.

The Secular Party is concerned about the sexualisation of children in advertising and the media, and will support research being conducted into measures to address the problem.

Same as above.

Family First wants to reform television standards so that sexualised music video clips cannot be shown during children's viewing time and offensive advertisements like the Nandos pole dancer commercial cannot be shown.

Every day we see images in print and on television that tell girls and young women they should wear less and be sexually available. Children are not being allowed the innocent childhood that is their right.

Earlier this year Family First was quizzing government officials in a senate committee on television standards and was shocked to find no one in the Howard Government is responsible for regulating advertising. With some minor exceptions, the job of regulating advertising is left to the industry body, the Advertising Standards Bureau. So no-one is publicly accountable.

Family First is appalled that the television advertising industry regulates itself. The Advertising Standards Bureau is an industry body comprising actors, academics, artists, writers and ex-politicians. Family First does not believe this is appropriate.

Family First calls on the Government to take responsibility for television advertising to ensure ads reflect community standards. Family First believes this should be the responsibility of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

Labor's National Platform acknowledges concerns about the sexualisation of young women and children, and the serious psychological and other problems this can cause - including eating disorders and mental health problems.  

Labor will develop strategies to prevent and reduce the damage being caused by the increased sexualisation of young women in all media.

Labor is concerned about the sexualisation of children and adults in the media, and will support research being conducted into these areas. To this end, Labor supported the recent Motion regarding the sexualisation of children in the media. This motion called on the Government to call for reviews of the Commercial Television Code of Practice and Commercial Radio Code of Practice to review the effect of sexualisation of children in the media, and to report on strategies to prevent and/or reduce sexualisation of children in the media.

Labor considered that the review should have gone further and encompassed all media platforms.

Labor welcomes the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) indicating that it will review its advertising to children's code, including considering the sexualisation of children and display of body image in advertising. We welcome the AANA's indication that it will consider relinquishing control & management of its codes of practice if required.

Labor is eagerly awaiting the outcome of these reviews.

Same as above.

Same as above.

The Coalition takes the well being of all Australians, especially children, extremely seriously and finds reports about the premature sexualisation of children alarming.

Accordingly, the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Coonan presented a joint Notice of Motion in the Senate on 15 August 2007 which was passed by the Parliament.

This Notice confirms the coalition Government's recognition of this issue. The Notice of Motion:
 

• Acknowledges that current research demonstrates that any sexualisation of children in the media will have harmful effects, especially on young girls;
• Calls on the commercial television and radio industries to include a consideration of this matter in their code of practice reviews which are presently underway; and
• Asks the broadcasting regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to report to Government by 31 March 2008 on strategies to prevent and/or reduce the sexualisation of children in the media, and on the effectiveness of different approaches.

More generally, under the national system of advertising self-regulation, advertisers are expected to comply with a number of industry-developed codes of practice. These include the Advertiser Code of Ethics and the Code for Advertising to Children which have been developed by the Australian Association of National Advertisers. In April 2007, the Australian Association of National Advertisers announced a review of the Code for Advertising to Children to consider the issue of sexualisation of children and submissions have been invited from members of the public.
 

Yes we would take these and more measures to combat pornography including:

• Extending the prohibition on the possession and sale of X18+ films throughout the Northern Territory.
• Cutting off the supply of such films at their source through an amendment to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956.
• Prohibiting the carriage of X18+ films by a carrier service.
• Prohibiting the production and sale of X18+ films in the Australian Capital Territory.

The LDP does not believe that the government should run people’s lives. John Howard is not our mother and should not be interfering in our voluntary non-violent actions. The LDP supports an individual’s freedom of choice regarding pornography and is absolutely opposed to all forms of government censorship.

Pornography demeans women and corrupts men. It contributes to the dissolution of families and devastates the lives of children who are exposed to it. There is no place for pornography in any medium.

This is especially the case with hardcore pornography. CDP believes that the X-rated classification for films should be abolished and Commonwealth legislation introduced to prohibit the production and sale of these films in the ACT and the Northern Territory.  Such films should not be allowed to enter Australia and CDP will support any steps to cut off their supply and distribution anywhere in Australia.

CDP supports a mandatory filtering at Internet Service Provider level to exclude all material which would be classified X or refused classification. The scheme should also provide a family-friendly Internet service with no material that would be rated MA15+ or higher. CDP supports increased police resources to Internet monitoring in order to detect child sex offenders.

That pornography may offend against a pious sense of morality is not justification for restricting freedom of adult access to it. We may deplore such things, but we think that censorship is a greater evil. Such decisions should be based only on a rational judgement of the harms and risks that may be associated with it.
 

Same as above.

Family First noted that pornography is a problem in the wider community, but not to the extent of the accounts of pornography in indigenous communities in the Northern Territory, where some children are brought up to regard this material as normal.

Family First notes that all government-funded computers in the Northern Territory will have special pornography restrictions. That is important, but it is also an irony given that federal parliament does not place the same restrictions on the computers of its members and senators. Family First has campaigned for members and senators to show leadership on this issue.

Family First believes we should be doing everything possible to ban Internet pornography and protect our children from this vile material.

Family First believes Internet pornography is a huge community concern. Parents want a safe Internet environment for their kids yet feel powerless because we cannot be watching over their shoulders all the time to monitor what they are seeing.

Family First supports the Government's National Filter Scheme but is disappointed the Government has failed to deliver mandatory filtering at the Internet Service Provided (ISP) level.

Family First supports providing free filter software for public libraries but is concerned because libraries do not have to install it.

Family First has long been calling for mandatory filtering at the ISP level. It is only by mandatory filtering at the ISP level that we can help protect all children from exposure to pornography.

Labor understands that one of the greatest anxieties for parents these days is raising their kids with decent standards and protecting them from the worst influences of our culture. Labor believes that more can be done to protect our children from pornography.

Labor supports a requirement for internet service providers to offer a filtered clean feed Internet service to all households, schools and other public internet points accessible by children. The clean feed service would require ISPs to block access to content that has been prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, including sites containing child pornography, acts of extreme violence or cruelty, and X-rated material.

Labor recently placed into parliament legislation that would create a specific offence of distributing child pornography or child abuse material by post. Currently, there is only a general offence of distributing offensive material and this carries only two years' imprisonment. This creates the strange anomaly that if you import child
pornography you can face a ten year sentence but if you distribute it the worst you can get is two years.

Labor recognises that parents are also concerned about whether the standards of film and literature censorship in Australia are slipping – and in particular, whether films that are really in the 'X' category are now being rated 'R'. Labor is concerned that the guidelines are not being applied sufficiently robustly by the Classification Board and especially, the Classification Review Board. This is a serious responsibility, as discussed above.

At this stage this represents Labor's main commitments to act against pornography but in government Labor will examine further proposals on their merits and on the available evidence.

Same as above.

Same as above.

The Coalition understands the concern of parents and carers across Australia in relation to pornography.

The Australian Government has jurisdiction over online content. Broadcasting of material which is classified X18+ or above is prohibited. It is also prohibited to use a content service or broadcast service to transmit material which is classified X18+ or above.

The sale of X18+ material is allowed in the ACT by the ACT Government. The Australian Government does not have control over the sale of consumer products by the states or territories.

However, the possession and distribution (including sale) of X18+ material is prohibited in the Northern Territory under the Northern Territory emergency legislation.

The Coalition will further seek to amend legislation shortly to deal with the viewing via Pay-TV subscription of other pornographic content in the Northern Territory.

The Coalition understands that families across Australia are particularly concerned about the possibility of their children being exposed to inappropriate or illegal content and predatory behaviour online including 'grooming'.

For this reason, it will continue to support its NetAlert - Protecting Australian Families Online initiative. This is a comprehensive $189 million programme recently launched to help protect Australian children online. This multifaceted online safety initiative includes significant additional resources for the Australian Federal Police Online Crime Sex Exploitation Team, a dedicated Internet safety helpline and website, an enhanced Internet safety school outreach program and free PC-based Internet filters and the mandatory provision of Internet Service Provider (ISP) level filtered service.

All these Coalition measures combined will help protect Australian families online and are working to ensure Australia is a world leader in the field of online safety.