Unofficial Scorecard: Only One AU AG in Favor of R18+

As the window closes for public responses to the Australian government’s Discussion Paper on the subject of an R18+ rating category for games, where does each territory’s Attorney General stand on the issue?

GameSpot, which has been all over the subject, offers up just such a recount for us, noting that as of a year ago, two Attorney Generals were publically in favor of adding the rating category. That number has now dwindled to one, Australian Capital Territory AG Simon Corbell, who states:

The ACT Government supports the introduction of an R18+ classification for video games, similar to that of films and television. This position has been conveyed at meetings of commonwealth, state and territory ministers on a number of occasions.

Victorian AG Rob Hulls previously supported the measure, but has recanted, saying that he would not “pre-empt the consultation by announcing a position on this issue.”

Outside of South Australia AG Michael Atkinson, whose position on the matter is not exactly a secret, and Northern Territory AG Delia Lawrie, who declined to comment, the remaining AG’s buried their take on the matter in rhetoric:

New South Wales AG John Hatzistergos, through a spokesperson:

The position of Censorship Ministers on this issue should therefore be informed by views of the broader community. The consultation process now under way is an important step in achieving this.

Tasmanian AG Lara Giddings, through a spokesperson:

We are currently working through the discussion paper, weighing up the arguments for and against the classification, and intend to lodge a submission before the closing date of 28 February 2010.

Queensland AG Cameron Dick:

We are currently finalising our position in relation to the issues raised in the discussion paper.

Western Australian AG Christian Porter:

Ministers will make a decision on this matter after they have had time to consider the discussion paper and any submissions.

Again, submissions to the Discussion Paper are due by February 28.

Thanks Ryan!

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    "Rhetoric is the art of using language to persuade."

    So no, saying "We are waiting for the discussion to end so we can evaluate all the facts and information" is NOT rhetoric.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  2. 0
    Lou says:

    That falls under rethoric too you know.

    You have heard the news when US politicians are asked about a position on a subject. They tend to say that they are either pro, against or looking at the "facts" ito take a stance on the matter. 

    Normal politics at work children. The sad part about this is that the people who are supposed to take a neutral point of view are acting like such.

  3. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    One funny idea in 6 months and you’ve already milked it dry.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  4. 0
    SeanB says:

     I agree with all the other comments here as of this time. GP really messed up this headline. I’l call you "Little Fox" for today.

    EDIT: To elaborate, one sentence alone would have silenced our critisizm on this matter. "Austrailian AG’s appear to be in favor of letting the public decide"

  5. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Nothing like a terribly-written sensationalist story that tries to misrepresent the facts like this to make me miss Dennis.

    You don’t even have to look any further than the headlines here and on Gamespot for proof of that:

    "Aussie Censorship Ministers Remain Quiet On R18+" – Gamespots headline

    "Unofficial Scorecard: Only One AU AG in Favor of R18+" – GamePolitics headline.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  6. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    The GP article kinda misstates the facts. After all, it could be said that only one AG has come out against the R18+ rating. As it stands, it seems to me that the sides are equal at 1 pro and one anti R18+.

  7. 0
    DorkmasterFlek says:

    Oh come on, they aren’t for or against it yet.  They haven’t taken a stance because the discussion is still ongoing and they’re waiting until it’s completed.  What a ridiculous headline.  I expect better from this site.

  8. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    The headline doesn’t bug me as much as this comment:

    "…the remaining AG’s buried their take on the matter in rhetoric:"


    Looks to me like they simply want to examine the discussions on the issue rather than make the blind jump to a decision.


    NW2K Software

    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as

  9. 0
    Thomas says:

    Rather sensationalist headline..

    It would be rather unprofessional of them to state that they have made a decision when they are supposed to listen to the for and against arguements and view public opinion in the discussion paper.

    "We never paid any heed to the ancient prophecies… Like fools we clung to the old hatreds, and fought as we had for generations"

Leave a Reply