Libs (Finally) Oppose Internet Filter

About time

The federal coalition has announced it will scrap controversial plans for an internet filter if it wins the August 21 election.

I’m glad they finally made their position clear. Abbott had previously indicated a lack of faith in the technical implementation, but – worryingly – not much opposition to the concept (ie, you got the impression that if he thought it would “work” at blocking content, he might support it.) Hockey’s opposition has been more consistent, and more in line with libertarians:

“I have personal responsibility as a parent,” he said in March.

“If I want to stop my children from viewing material that I feel is inappropriate then that is my responsibility to do something about it – not that of the government.”

UPDATE: The Australian Christian Lobby has come out strongly against the Coalition’s rejection of the Internet filter.

11 thoughts on “Libs (Finally) Oppose Internet Filter

  1. Joe made a speech at the Grattan Institute during which he claimed to be strongly influenced by John Stuart Mill which probably explains his views.

    Perhaps he is the token liberal in the Liberal Party. 🙂

    While we may be able to relax a bit on this issue, we need to remain vigilant as every government likes the idea of controlling the flow of information to the public, and the internet is seen as a threat to them.

  2. Anyone who votes for Labor despite their continued support for internet filtering is an enemy of Liberty. I’d like to see the perennial “fence-sitters” explain this one away.

  3. Why Hell Yobbo, what about all those little children out there? If you believe that shit you will believe the Labor voters are as pure as the driven snow on this issue. Yeah mate, I know, but how long does it take for these wankers to realise they’ve been had.

  4. Joe Hockey is a nice guy, but I would dispute that he’s a “liberal” in the traditional sense. He has, after all, consistently supported an ETS, despite its obvious flaws and the dodgy science behind AGW.
    Alas, at this election, the true choice between the two major parties is that of “big government” and “even bigger government”.
    Even so, given this status quo, any glimpses of policy sanity must be welcomed; no matter how small.

  5. Yes, I didn’t mean to imply that Hockey was a classical liberal – just that his position in this case (parental responsibility) was more consistent with libertarian/classical liberal ideology.

    BTW, I just added an update regarding the response from the Australian Christian lobby. The Christian right are often regarded as a base for the Liberal party – at least, that’s how they like to paint Tony (as the mod monk – a crazy catholic). Yet here we have the Libs getting whacked by the ACL for opposing the filter, whilst at the same time, the Labor PM – an avowed atheist – pledges money (ours, not hers, natch) for MacKillop “celebrations”

    Imagine the reaction if it was the other way around?

  6. The Liberals waited until the senate preference deal with the Christian Democrats was finalised.

  7. Hmmm… that might explain why they waited. Dodgy, if so… I’d much rather they explain to them why it’s in their best interests to oppose the filter (most Christians I know seem to get it)

  8. Pingback: Libs (Finally) Oppose Internet Filter « Thoughts on Freedom | Unblocked News

  9. I have not seen any polling in Australia that is accurate enough to be able to predict victory properly. Our electorates are so small that people often work several electorates away. The polling bias I have seen is appauling (for example people who are randomly called are much more likly to vote labour because they are mostly people who are on some form of welfare). The only proper way to do polling is randomly select house holds and pay them to provide accurate information on which way they will vote. Thats what the accurate USA pollsters do.

Comments are closed.