Intergovernmental Agreement On Censorship

3.125 Another example of a Cabinet model is the Council of Ministers for Genetic Engineering (GTMC). The GTMC oversees the implementation of the Genetic Engineering Act 2000 (Cth) and the functioning of the Genetic Engineering Regulatory Authority. The GTMC was created by an intergovernmental agreement between the Australian Government and all state and territory governments. The Intergovernmental Agreement also obliges state and territory governments to adopt appropriate state and territorial laws. [144] The Commonwealth Classification Act 1995, known as the Classification Act, defines how content is identified and then classified for censorship, but each state and territory prescribes at what level criminalization takes place within each jurisdiction. The classification of each product must then (theoretically) be distributed in terms of legality within each state and territory. 3.122 COAG is Australia`s highest intergovernmental forum. COAG is composed of the Prime Minister, the State Prime Minister, the Territorial Prime Minister and the President of the Australian Association for Local Government (ALGA). The COAG secretariat is located in the Prime Minister`s department and the Cabinet.

COAG`s role is to initiate, develop and monitor the implementation of policy reforms of national importance and requiring cooperative action by Australian governments. 3.140 Consultation is not necessary every time a state or territory changes its own data protection provisions. However, the recommended intergovernmental agreement should oblige States and territories to consult with each other before amending certain elements of their own legislation. These elements include the elements mentioned by the LCRA in Recommendation 3-4, which in some cases have an impact on national consistency. 3.139 The ALRC believes that it is useful for the intergovernmental agreement to establish a consultation process in which states and territories propose to amend their own data protection regulations. Such a consultation process will promote and maintain national coherence. [footnote 85] NZ Office of Film and Literature Classification (2012) `Classifying Video Games`, OFLC website, accessed 18 October 2012 . Online video games hosted in New Zealand are also covered by classification laws. See: NZ Office of Film and Literature Classification (2012) `Classifying Online Games`, OFLC website, accessed 19 October 2012, . 3.128 The agreement should provide for a procedure in which the party proposing a change subject to authorization must notify the other parties in writing and the proposed amendment to SCAG must be reviewed and approved before it can be implemented. [146] 3.133 A standing body would contribute to maintaining national coherence in the regulation of personal data. .

. .