Andrew
Dismore (Hendon) (Lab):
I beg to move, that leave be given to introduce a
Bill to extend the criteria under which music and sports video works and
documentaries lose their exemption from classification.
Although we passed-or perhaps I should say
re-passed-the Video Recordings Bill last week, for technical reasons of
urgency it was not practical to propose amendments at that stage.
However, some small but highly significant amendments are needed to
ensure a more robust regime for child protection. As chair of the Joint
Committee on Human Rights, I am an ardent supporter of the right to free
speech and expression, but I acknowledge the need for a system of
regulation that protects children from harmful content in film, videos
and DVDs.
At the current time, we have a very effective
system of classification. The British Board of Film Classification
undertakes extensive research into public opinion about what is
acceptable content. The BBFC also takes account of research evidence and
the advice of psychologists, health care professionals and the police,
among others, to produce guidelines, which are updated every four years,
that ensure that the content that reaches children in the UK legally in
the form of film, DVDs and videos is of an age-appropriate nature and is
not harmful to them.
However, there are gaps in the current regime
covering videos and DVDs under the Video Recordings Act 1984-the VRA-and
that is what my Bill aims to address. The VRA permits a number of
exemptions to the classification regime. Currently they relate not only
to video games but to other video works such as music and sports videos.
When the Act was passed in 1984, the assumption was that such works were
unlikely to cause any concern. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of
State for Culture, Media and Sport has recognised that the regime for
video games needs to be updated, and the Digital Economy Bill, currently
in the other place, is intended to do so. As an aside, it is important
to note that in doing so it should in no way undermine the
classification regime for linear-non-interactive-material by confusing
the responsibilities of the BBFC and those of the Video Standards
Council, which is intended to be the statutory authority for classifying
video games.
Except in relation to video games, exemptions
are unfortunately not addressed in the Digital Economy Bill. That is a
missed opportunity and the reason why I have chosen to bring forward my
Bill, which would extend the criteria under section 2 of the VRA to
result in specified video works losing exemption from classification. At
present, exemption can be claimed for video works such as music and
sports videos, which can be very popular with children. Those videos can
then be sold to children perfectly legally, even if they contain
material that is potentially harmful. My Bill is not intended to extend
the VRA to all such exempted works, only to those that contain content
that is potentially harmful, such as graphic violence, sexual content
falling 12 Jan 2010 : Column 561 short of actual sexual activity,
imitable dangerous behaviour and drug use. Harmless video works of
football matches or artists from the The X Factor would remain
exempt.
I have seen some of the less benign sport and
music videos myself. For example, the Ultimate Fighting Championship's
UFC Best of 2007 is a combat video featuring martial arts and
other fighting techniques. It is available on the high street to any
child because its distributor has, quite legally, claimed exemption from
BBFC classification under the VRA. It therefore carries no age rating or
consumer advice. It contains close-up images of bloody and sustained
head blows, which are replayed in slow motion from every conceivable
angle to ensure that the best possible view is given of the moments of
impact.
Another work that I have seen is Motley Crüe's
Greatest Video Hits, which features topless lap dancing and a
George W. Bush lookalike in a limousine with a prostitute. The packaging
carries an E for exempt rating. Gorgoroth's Ad Majorem Sathanas
Gloriam features bloody bodies being crucified and a sheep's head on
a spike. The American band Slipknot is hugely popular with children,
some as young as 10, as well as with teenagers. As expected from the
band's reputation, its 10th anniversary DVD features strong content
designed to offend parents. Among the most concerning images are those
of the consequences of self-mutilation carried out by two teenage girls
who have carved the name Slipknot into their arm and torso
respectively, yet the video carries a letter E in a green triangle
indicating that it is exempt from VRA classification.
Those are all works that parents could and
should legitimately expect to be regulated, yet under the current
legislation they can all be sold legally without any age restriction.
Indeed, it is worth noting that some of that material is rated and
age-restricted in other countries. For example, the German film
classification body rated the Slipknot DVD as suitable only for those
aged 16 and above and the Gorgoroth DVD as suitable only for adults.
Trading standards officers would welcome the
power to prosecute the supply of such unclassified works, but believe
that the current legislation exempts them because, for example, they do
not contain gross violence, which is a very high threshold, or actual
sexual activity. Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services,
which represents local authorities on this matter, and the BBFC both
support my Bill's minor amendments to section 2 of the VRA in order to
broaden the criteria that determine when a video work loses its
exemption. Such amendments would enable law enforcement agencies to
prosecute the supply of video works that are currently exempted, to
protect children from potentially harmful media content.
I understand that the Government believe that
the enforcement authorities can already take such action. However, the
view of those who actually have that responsibility is that they cannot,
because of the very high bar set by the VRA in order to lose an
exemption. For example, had the Slipknot DVD shown the two girls
actually in the process of mutilating themselves with a sharp blade,
that may well have constituted gross violence under the VRA, but showing
the scars after the event almost certainly does not constitute violence
sufficient to lose exemption from classification.
Many responsible members of the home
entertainment industry voluntarily seek classification certificates for
exempted video works that contain such potentially harmful material.
Members of the British Video Association-the BVA-do so even though they
are not legally obliged so to do. Their actions in this regard are to be
commended. I understand that BVA members support amendments to the Video
Recordings Act that would make it a legal obligation on distributors to
have potentially harmful material classified, as proposed in my Bill,
but there are distributors who do not take the same responsible
attitude. That lack of a level playing field serves only to add to
consumer confusion.
A parent looking through a shelf of music or
fighting videos, some of which are rated 15 or 18, but some of which are
marked E for exempt, is likely reasonably to draw the conclusion that
the E video is suitable for younger children. Otherwise, the parents
would assume, surely it would have been classified. Yet often, the
content of E for exempt videos is virtually identical to or worse than
that of an age-restricted product. I would therefore like to urge my
hon. Friend the Minister to support this Bill.
To conclude, this Bill is aimed at modernising
the VRA and improving consumer-and most particularly-parental
empowerment, to protect their vulnerable children from harmful video
material. I commend this Bill to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Ordered, that Mr. Andrew Dismore, Mike Gapes, Rob Marris, Mr.
Virendra Sharma, Mr. Edward Timpson, John Austin, Ms Karen Buck, Clive
Efford, Mr. John Whittingdale, Judy Mallaber and Keith Vaz present the
Bill.
Mr. Andrew Dismore accordingly presented the Bill.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 26
February and to be printed.
