Game developers say they were not consulted before the Coalition announced plans to change the classification of video games with loot boxes.
Labor criticised the timing of the pre-election announcement, with the opposition and industry advocates saying the government sat on a review of Australia’s outdated classification system for close to two years.
The communications minister, Paul Fletcher, said on Wednesday a re-elected Coalition government would update Australia’s classification code which, apart from allowing R-ratings for video games in 2013, has not been updated since the VHS era.
The changes would “address a range of issues” including the use of loot boxes in video games – where people can pay money for in-game mystery boxes with items that can be collected and used in the game. The proposed changes would include a minimum classification rating for games that simulate gambling.
The changes would also address content that sexualises children or depicts suicide or violence against women.
“The government’s priority is keeping Australians safe online, so having clearer advice alerting parents and other consumers to the presence of in-game purchases, such as loot boxes, will help them manage their and their children’s engagement with this content,” Fletcher said.
“This isn’t about banning or censoring content: it’s about ensuring families can make more informed choices.”
The federal government undertook a broad-ranging review of the classification system in December 2019, with submissions open until February 2020.
Since then, the government has not responded to the submissions, despite bringing in the Online Safety Act in the interim two years. The act relies on the system to determine what content can be viewed online and what social media platforms must remove.
Ron Curry, the CEO of the Interactive Games and Entertainment Association, said the organisation had worked closely with the Coalition government on the 2019 review and was still waiting to see the results.
He said the association was not consulted prior to Wednesday’s announcement, but welcomed the opportunity for another public consultation.
“We would like to note though, that this is a cooperative scheme and any government would need agreement from each of the states and territories before changes can be made,” he said. “It is not a unilateral decision of the federal government.”
Fletcher said the changes would be informed by “consultation with families and communities, experts in fields relating to child wellbeing, industry and other key stakeholders, and state and territory ministers, as required under the National Classification Scheme.”
Labor’s shadow minister for communications, Michelle Rowland, said the announcement showed the government wasn’t serious about protecting consumers, or it would not have sat on the classification review for two years or “waited until the eve of an election” to make the announcement.
“The review of the classification scheme … has not been released or responded to by the Morrison government, some two years later,” she said.
“Australians and their families rely on classification ratings to inform choices about they and those in their care watch, read and play.
“Under Scott Morrison, work to ensure the scheme reflects modern content and delivery platforms has fallen hopelessly behind and simply has not been completed.”
Rowland said the government had been given many opportunities to act on loot boxes alone since 2019, including after a Senate inquiry and a House of Representatives inquiry into age verification.
Sex workers and others who post adult content online had previously warned that the current classification system, when enforced under the Online Safety Act, will lead to their content being censored or removed online.
Samantha Floreani, the program lead at Digital Rights Watch, said the classification system is “outdated and not fit for purpose” and the changes should have been made before the Online Safety Act was passed into law.
“This is yet another example of the Morrison government’s kneejerk approach to tech policy. We need comprehensive tech policy development with safety mechanisms like privacy, security, and community empowerment at the centre,” Floreani said.
“Instead, we are getting a reactive and piecemeal approach to online safety that results in complex schemes with multiple moving parts.”
