7. Classification regulation should be kept to the minimum needed to achieve a clear public purpose, should be clear in its scope and application

Published on 12 August 2011. Last modified on 2 September 2011.

The ALRC is interested in views on the most suitable balance between direct government regulation and other approaches where there is greater involvement of industry in the regulation process.

A guiding principle for government regulation in Australia has been “to deliver effective and efficient regulation — regulation that is effective in addressing an identified problem and efficient in terms of maximising the benefits to the community, taking account of the costs”.

Keeping in mind the issues of effectiveness, efficiency and cost, the  ALRC Issues Paper identified baseline principles to determine whether classification regulation was best undertaken by government or industry assessors.

Direct government regulation to be considered when:

Self-regulation/co-regulation to be considered when:

Problem is high-risk, of high impact or high significance

Problem is low risk, of low impact or low significance

Community requires that certainty be provided through legal sanction

There are no/few strong public interest concerns (particularly with reference to public health and safety)

There is a history of significant compliance problems or flagrant breaches of fair trading principles

There is a history of industry compliance and “good corporate citizenship”

There is little likelihood of effective sanctions for non-compliance

Market-based incentives exist  to promote individuals or groups to comply with guidelines

Comments (3)

Free TV strongly supports

Submitted by Free TV Australia on 1 September 2011.

Free TV strongly supports this principle, though suggests a minor amendment. The clarity and consistency of the classification framework is covered in proposed Principle 4a. The commitment to a minimalist regulatory regime is significant and should be a stand-alone principle. Free TV is in favour of an information based classification framework which enables content consumers to make informed choices, as opposed to a prescriptive framework limiting access to material overall.

Suggested new Principle 7: Classification regulation should be kept to the minimum needed to achieve a clear public purpose.

The inclusion of regulation

Submitted by Brownbear on 21 August 2011.
The inclusion of regulation in the classification scheme has enabled Governments in the past to use the scheme to fulfill their own political purpose. Classification needs to be independent of Government interference so that the public can have confidence that the classification that has been made is not a political decision. Regulation is very much the function of Government. It should be directed at protecting the integrity of the classification system. Producers of material should be responsible for the initial correct classification of the material. Regulation should be used to impose sanctions on those producers of material who carelessly disregard or totally abrogate their responsibilities. If there is proof material will be significantly harmful after rigorous peer reviewed scientific study then that material should be made illegal to acquire posses or distribute.

The purpose should be

Submitted by JT on 12 August 2011.
The purpose should be justified, not just clear.