Today was the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) meeting we've all been waiting for, the one Federal Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O'Connor, suggested was "crunch time", hoping the Attorneys-General could finally come to a unanimous decision.
Good news was heard all-round though, with all States and Territories finally coming together and agreeing on the introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames on principal, barring one as
GameSpot AU reported. New South Wales abstained from the vote, holding up the required unanimous decision to meet with his NSW cabinet and make a decision that "would not take long".
On Tuesday
we reported that NSW's AG, Greg Smith, planned on abstaining on a decision in order to wait on the official Classification Review scheme submission from the ALRC, which isn't due until 2012.
GameSpot, however, reports that in the wake of the near-unanimous vote, Smith plans on deciding on the matter "ASAP".
Posted 02:13pm 22/7/11
silly SA is still getting rid of the MA15+ rating and changing it to R18+
last edited by ravn0s at 14:13:35 22/Jul/11
Posted 02:20pm 22/7/11
Posted 02:45pm 22/7/11
Posted 04:00pm 22/7/11
Posted 04:14pm 22/7/11
Posted 04:26pm 22/7/11
Posted 04:37pm 22/7/11
Sounds like the process is seriously wrong when simply abstaining from the vote can hold it up if the other 90% are in complete agreement. I'm not sure why the federal government didn't step in sooner to end the indecision merry-go-round.
What other kinds of lower profile issues do they meet to decide on that get delayed for eternity because one of the state attorneys general realised he can't vote because his shoelace was untied?
Posted 04:38pm 22/7/11
There's always going to be an RC category, regardless of what the requirements for R18+ are. The question now is will the requirements for this new R18+ actually be more than our current MA15+.
Posted 04:50pm 22/7/11
Posted 04:57pm 22/7/11
Posted 05:05pm 22/7/11
Posted 06:17pm 22/7/11
Edit: ACL page on this.
Cautiously welcomes it? Pigs. F*****g. Arse!
Posted 09:00pm 22/7/11
he is an AG, he has been shadow AG for years, he is either incompetent, scared of Fred Nile or basically a Liberal dufus. Idiot not so sure, but if the pointy hat fits...
Posted 09:21pm 22/7/11
Well then he shouldn't be making important decisions like this if he's not up to it. And this issue has been around longer than 3 months. The guy is just f*****g around and wasting tax payers money.
Posted 09:23pm 22/7/11
Posted 09:50pm 22/7/11
EDIT - WTF ACL.
Name me 1 god damn movie where there is simulated paedophilia. F*****g fear mongers.
I thought that the decision they came to, was that they didn't come to a decision because of the NSW AG? Doesn't that mean no R18 for us?
last edited by DM at 21:50:31 22/Jul/11
Posted 10:51pm 22/7/11
I'm not convinced this will be the case tbh. It appears the criteria for RC will remain unchanged...
Posted 12:26am 23/7/11
Even if he really is super f*** off busy since the election then surely he has a department staffed with some of the same people as the previous AG and they'd be across the issue and be able to give him the 60 second break down and of NSW's previous stance at these kinds of meetings in order for him to make a decision.
Not to mention that this sort of stuff should have at least been on the radar while they were in shadow government.
Posted 05:56pm 23/7/11
That was basiclly a yes as far as I can see. It wasn't a No so have no objections as to which way it goes.