TS

You say: "Freedom of speech is fundamentally important in a democratic society and there was never any suggestion that the Australian Government would seek to block political content. In this context, claims that the Government's policy is analogous to the approach taken by countries such as Iran, China and Saudi Arabia are not justified." That's because you cherry-picked the context. It's not just about political content: it's about ALL content. If you can block one thing, there is NOTHING we, Australia, can do to stop [insert government of the day here] from blocking ANYTHING ELSE. And just because you feel *your* government is magnanimous and beneficent enough to only block things the rest of us don't need to know about (and there is considerable opinion to the contrary), DO NOT make the mistake of expecting every single future government to never ever abuse the marvellously convenient infrastructure put in place by The Rudd Labor Government. I say this again: just because YOU won't use the filter to suppress freedom of speech, does NOT mean someone else won't either. There will be absolutely no way for any member of the public to tell (or prove) if some faceless bureaucrat 10 years from now gets bribed by the then-in-power Liberal government to just "accidentally" slap "alp.gov.au/*" into the blacklist. No oversight, no transparency, no chance of review, no say whatsoever. Think I'm paranoid? Ask yourself how much you *REALLY* trust your political rivals. If you unleash this infrastructure upon the nation, you WILL be damaging freedom of speech, whether it is your intent or not. And in THAT context, Mr. Conroy, the comparisons to China, Iran, Burma, Saudi Arabia and other such shining examples of Freedom and Democracy are justified, earned and deserved. If you make this bed, you will have to lie in it.