1. Cross-rating ‘18’ and the Streamlining of the OFLC

There is a serious case to be made for the Labelling Body to deal with all publications which have been previously classified by an OCA, by using an across-the-board ‘cross-rating’ mechanism, and for the OFLC to be dedicated to solely dealing with material that has not been previously classified by an OCA.

There is a strong philosophical case to suggest that adults in New Zealand should have the choice to watch/rent/purchase film culture without the intervention or approval of the state, unless the film contains material which, according to the Act, meets criteria that is deemed potentially ‘objectionable’ (eg. sexual violence, bestiality, necrophilia, etc.)

As progressive as this might sound, this is exactly what is happening in our competing media streams - pay television, web media and the private importation of films via the web.

Neither would it mean a ‘free-for-all’, as the State would still be able to monitor and control the compliance of material through the mechanisms of the Labelling Body, who would maintain their role as ‘gate-keepers’.

If this scenario were to be adopted it would result in a palpable downsizing of the OFLC, and we accept that this scenario is unlikely to be seriously considered at this juncture.

But, given the reality of hyper-communication, escalating global interdependence, and the homogenisation of global culture, it is surely inevitable that in the not-too-distant future, the classification office will have to radically adapt in order to maintain its relevance.

Bearing out this argument, albeit indirectly, the Law Commission suggested the idea of “confining the Act to the two areas that really matter, namely sex with children and sex plus violence.”(4)

In the meantime we are content to move the legislation a little more along the continuum, in our appeal for contemporary, relevant law that will command respect and encourage compliance.