Australian NSW AG Backs R18+ Rating

August 10, 2011 -

Last month, Australia's attorneys-general agreed "in-principle” to introduce an R18+ ratings category for video games in the country. At the same time, NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith abstained from the R18+ vote, but promised to take the issue back to his Cabinet before making a final decision. Despite the fact that Smith abstained from voting, Federal Minister for Home Affairs Brendan O'Connor announced that the federal government would move ahead with introducing the R18+ rating for games based on the support from the remaining states and territories.

The good news today, according to GameSpot, is that Smith has decided to support the general consensus of other AG's that a new ratings classification is needed.

In a statement to the ABC, Smith's office announced the NSW government's formal support of R18+:

"Few people would dispute the value of a classification system that helps keep adult material beyond the reach of children," Smith said in the statement. "With strong classification guidelines in place, an R18+ rating should result in violent games currently rated MA15+ in Australia being reclassified as adults-only, as they already are in many other countries. ''

Smith added that he would work with other attorneys-general on drafting the national R18+ for games guidelines.

Federal Minister for Home Affairs Brendan O'Connor welcomed Smith's announcement, saying:

"I am delighted that NSW has decided to support what is not just a practical public policy, but a very popular policy," O'Connor said in a statement to the media. "The introduction of an R18+ classification for computer games will provide better advice to parents and help prevent children and teenagers from accessing unsuitable material. Once introduced, the new classification will also afford adults the opportunity to view material designed for adults."

"It is a credit to all jurisdictions that the meeting has now been able to achieve agreement over what is a complex matter in classification policy."

O'Connor's office has said that the Australian government is in the process of preparing legislation that would introduce R18+ for games. This would include the new classification, along with changes to existing rules and categories in the current ratings system. One of the interesting changes is to "ultra violent" games getting a rating for adults only. In the past games such as Mortal Kombat were simply refused classification because of extremely violent content. Under the new ratings system there might be a place for games such as MK. Games with strong sexual content will probably have a more difficult time, but that's the standard in just about every place in the world.

Source: GameSpot by way of Cheater87.


 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Infophile(cont'd) about non-union police officers being given hell until they joined the union.07/07/2015 - 4:58pm
InfophileParadoxically, the drive in the US to get rid of unions seems to have left only the most corrupt surviving. They seem to be the only ones that can find ways to browbeat employees into joining when paying dues isn't mandatory. I've heard some stories ...07/07/2015 - 4:57pm
Matthew WilsonI am old school on this. I believe its a conflict of interest to have public sector unions. that being said, I do not have a positive look on unions in general.07/07/2015 - 3:59pm
TechnogeekWhat's best for the employee tends to be good for the employer; other way around, not so much. So long as that's the case, there's going to be a far stronger incentive for management to behave in such a way that invites retalitation than for the union to.07/07/2015 - 3:10pm
TechnogeekTeachers' unions? State legislatures. UAW? Just look at GM's middle management.07/07/2015 - 3:05pm
TechnogeekIn many ways it seems that the worse a union tends to behave, the worse that the company's management has behaved in the past.07/07/2015 - 3:02pm
james_fudgeCharity starts at home ;)07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
james_fudgeSo mandatory charity? That sounds shitty to me07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, if Union dues are automatically withdrawn, then there is no such thing as a non-union employee.07/07/2015 - 2:38pm
Goth_Skunka mutually agreed upon charity instead.07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_Skunkyou enjoy the benefits of working in a union environment. If working in a union is against your religious beliefs or just something you wholeheartedly object to, dues will still be deducted from your pay, but you can instruct that they be directed towards07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_SkunkBasically, if you are employed in a business where employees are represented by a union for the purposes of collective bargaining, whether or not you are a union member, you will have union dues deducted from your pay, since regardless of membership,07/07/2015 - 2:32pm
Goth_SkunkIt's something that has existed in Canada since 1946. You can read more on it here: http://ow.ly/PiHWR07/07/2015 - 2:27pm
Goth_SkunkSee, we have something similar in Canada, called a "Rand Employee." This is an employee who benefits from the collective bargaining efforts of a union, despite not wanting to be a part of it for whatever reason.07/07/2015 - 2:22pm
Matthew Wilson@info depends on the sector. for example, have you looked at how powerful unions are in the public sector? I will make the argument they have too much power in that sector.07/07/2015 - 12:39pm
InfophileIt's easy to worry about unions having too much power and causing harm. The odd thing is, why do people seem to worry about that more than the fact that business-owners can have too much power and do harm, particularly at a time when unions have no power?07/07/2015 - 12:31pm
Matthew Wilsonthe thing is unions earned their bad reputation in the US. the way unions oparate the better at your job you are, the likely you want to be in a union.07/07/2015 - 11:33am
InfophilePut that way, "right to work" seems to have BLEEP-all to do with gay rights. Thing is, union-negotiated contracts used to be one of the key ways to prevent employers from firing at will. Without union protection, nothing stops at-will firing.07/07/2015 - 11:06am
Infophilehas an incentive to pay dues if they're represented either way, so the union is starved for funds and dies, unless things are bad enough that people will pay dues anyway.07/07/2015 - 11:02am
InfophileFor those who don't know, "right to work" laws mean that it can't be a condition of an employment contract that you pay union dues. That is, the right to work without having to pay dues. Catch is, unions have to represent non-members as well, so no one...07/07/2015 - 11:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician