Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is often said that the pen is mightier than the sword. Unfortunately, it seems that in this modern world the pen has been retired to the backbench or even out the back door. It constantly amazes me how empowering and disassociating the internet has become. It is empowering in the sense that all kinds of people can have opinions on everything—without necessarily being very well resourced or having a well thought-out argument—and they are able to peddle that over the internet. The thing that constantly amazes me is how indignant and rude, how offensive they can be, on the internet, when most times they are not like that in person. What is it that makes a normally meek, mild and inoffensive person a mean and offensive attacker when they get on their keyboard in front of their computer?

My experience is that, as members of parliament, we are all, from time to time, on the receiving end of fairly nasty emails. In fact a close young friend said to me the other day: 'What is it about people that they think they can say absolutely anything about politicians on the internet?' Every now and then I find a phone number for some of those people that say nasty things to me on the internet, and I say: 'Hey, Rowan here. You're not happy. What's going on?' And I am amazed, because they are not anywhere near as offensive when you meet them in person. When you talk to them on the phone, or if you visit them in person, they revert to the social norms. They live within the kinds of constraints we all live in. We might think things from time to time about people, but we do not abuse them and attack them to their face. So what is it that says, if you are on the internet it does not matter what you say? What is it that makes people think maybe they are not even identifiable when they are on the internet?

I was, as this House well knows, a farmer before I entered politics, and two-way radios are a very important part of modern farming. While it is not the same kind of technology as the internet, I often used to smile when I heard some of my neighbours, or people sharing my channel, say things like: 'We're going away for three weeks after lunch. Keep an eye on the place will you?' And I am thinking, why would you be advertising that in the ether? It is much like that with the internet; I think people just feel disconnected from the message, as though they are invisible. Unfortunately, that kind of behaviour is not reserved to just adults. In fact, the children of today are very adept with all things technological and certainly the internet, and make great use of it. Unfortunately, because they are just human like the rest of us, they seem to form the same impervious view when they sit behind the computer keyboard.

When bullies start on someone, when they start on your point of difference it really hurts. Children, we know, are far more sensitive to this than the rest of us. As we grow older, we do develop a little bit of defence; our skin gets a little bit thicker but not always—adults can be affected by the same attacks. I can remember as a kid, as a seven or eight-year-old, that all I wanted was to be just like everyone else. I did not want to stand out in a crowd and I do not think kids of today are any different.

We have always had schoolyard bullies. We have always had bullies at lots of points in our lives. I have got to say, schools have worked incredibly hard to try and round up bullying in the schoolyard, but they have always been there. But at least in the old days—if that is what we should call the pre-internet days—the child, the person could get relief because when they left school they could enter another part of their life. Maybe it was a scout group or somewhere they could go to where they were accepted or maybe it was just home. But the internet of course is 24 hours. It is at you the whole time. The really sharp point of it is not just when someone sends you a message but when they send hundreds of people the same message and then they all push the 'like' button. It just grows out of control. You can see why kids are driven to anxiety, depression and, as we well know, some to suicide. That is the saddest story of all. Often it occurs when those responsible adults around them do not even know what is going on.

This bill is about trying to address some of those issues. Like others that have spoken before me, may I heap some more praise on my good friend the member for Forrest, who has been a tireless campaigner in this area. The cyberbullying and education classes that she runs within her electorate, I think, are probably world standard. She has developed them to a fine art. I have looked at them and thought, 'How do I get these up and running myself?' and have not really got past that point—more shame on me for that. Perhaps this bill will make us go away and all try and repeat the kind of performance that the member for Forrest delivers for her electorate. It has been said before that it is difficult a backbencher to influence large policy outcomes in this parliament. But I do not think there is any doubt in this particular case that the member for Forrest has had a very large influence on this policy. If we have to chisel that on her grave stone, I do not think that would be such a bad thing—she would be remembered for the right things.

With the appointment of the Children's e-Safety Commissioner, $7½ million will be given to the commission to spend in a suitable way to set up education programs, to handle complaints and to provide advice to the government. The government on this issue is saying that it is serious. It is not just another issue where it is going to kick the can down the road. It is serious, it is now, it is happening and we need a response. I would not be so foolhardy as to say this bill is going to fix the job up and we will not have to worry about cyberbullying or inappropriate internet approaches to young people again. Of course it will not work that well.

It is worth saying in this place that the primary gatekeepers here are parents. They should not think that because the parliament is making a new set of laws surrounding cyberbullying that their children are safe and they do not have to do anything. If your kids are behind closed doors and on a computer, you should have some idea what they are up to. It is just too dangerous out there. I encourage parents to take every step to make sure they are close to their children so they can share those secrets, to keep a very close eye on them so they can so they can read their emotions and to try and have some understanding of what they are doing on the internet in those hours when they cannot see them.

I encourage parents to take the next step of putting filters on their home computers and filtering the kids' access points to computers. I think most parents would agree with that premise but might say, 'I should do that but little Sally is okay. I know she knows how to look after herself.' Or 'This does not happen with Tristan,' or whatever. Do not think that the government can do it for you. Do not think that that the Children's e-Safety Commissioner can do it for you. Parents have to take a very real role in this. As they always are, parents are the primary protectors of children.

I gave a little speech earlier up in the Federation Chamber and it was loosely about how unfortunate we can be if we choose the wrong parents. Consequently, some children are brought up in pretty dysfunctional households where the chances of coming into contact with cyberbullying are probably the least of their concerns. In those households, it is much harder and I hope that this legislation will provide some protection for them. But for all the others—the good parents—get on board, make sure you know what your kids are doing and show a direct interest.

The Children's e-Safety Commissioner, most importantly, will have the ability to bring the major providers under its wing. The process is broken up into two tiers. Tier 1 is virtually voluntary. We are asking the providers to do the right thing and it is basically a code of conduct. But if the provider does not do the right thing repeatedly, they will be moved onto tier 2 restrictions, which means there will be a forced compliance.

The bill follows over 12 months of consultation. A discussion paper was put forward in January last year. I think this is an example of careful, considered and sensible government where we have consulted with all the players and then arrived at a point of legislation that all agree, including the opposition—and thank you very much for your support—that this is a step in the right direction.

It is one of those things that we do agree on, and perhaps this is when parliament is at its finest. As I point out to many people who get a bit frustrated with the parliamentary process, if we all agreed on everything then there would not be much point in doing anything, would there? We do not always agree on the important issues and so it should be, because there are often two points of view. On this one, we are in very close harmony because we all realise the harm that can be done to young people. Harm done at a young age can be a legacy for the rest of your life. I commend these bills to the House and look forward to the commissioner are being appointed.

See this speech in context