National broadband provider iiNet today rejected Communications Minister Stephen Conroy’s claim over the weekend that it welcomed the Government’s filtering project.

“But this policy has been approved by 85 per cent of Australian internet service providers, who have said they would welcome the filter, including Telstra, Optus, iPrimus and iiNet,” Conroy told the Sun-Herald over the weekend.

But in a statement this afternoon, iiNet chief executive Michael Malone said Conroy was wrong.

“We have been involved in the Government’s consultation process in an effort to at least have some transparency measures introduced,” he said. “However, any claim that our participation in that consultation process is support for the Government’s policy is an outright lie.”

Malone said iiNet’s position in the matter was unchanged. “This proposed filter is a waste of money that should be instead spent on additional law enforcement and education resources,” he said.

The executive said “no western country” operated a mandatory filter along the lines of the Government’s proposal, and the filter project lined Australia up with Burma, Saudi Arabia and China and had rightly attracted criticism from technical experts, the industry, child safety groups and even the US government.

“The proposed filter is fundamentally flawed, will not achieve its stated purpose and simply will not work. It is fundamentally bad policy,” said Malone. “We do not and never have supported such a system.”

The office of Stephen Conroy has been contacted for comment.

Image credit: iiNet

Related posts:

1. Internode, iiNet, VHA won’t filter for now
2. iiNet CEO defends Interpol filter
3. Did the US State Dept merely query filter policy?
4. Conroy re-commits to filter, slams Lundy amendments
5. ‘Please explain’, Conroy tells Hockey on filter

1. Brendan
   Posted 31/05/2010 at 5:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

   It’s almost libelous to state such a thing about iiNet and other ISPs, since so many internet users would likely look for an alternate ISP if they don’t support censorship. Perhaps it would be best for Conroy to just remain silent for once, because as they say, it’s better keep your mouth shut and have people think you’re stupid than to open it and prove them right.

   • Renai LeMay
     Posted 31/05/2010 at 5:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

     I for one cannot understand how Conroy could ever think iiNet would be for the filter policy … they have been against it from the start.

2. CPKHarris
   Posted 01/06/2010 at 12:11 am | Permalink | Reply

   I’m glad that iiNet have clarified their position. The mere suggestion that they might be in support of the filter had me checking rates at Internode on Monday morning after querying @iinet via Twitter. Has anyone surveyed the top 20 ISPs in Australia? Are they all against the filter? If they are pro-filter, are their customers being told so that they have the opportunity to vote with their feet/wallets/modems?

   C!

   • Renai LeMay
     Posted 01/06/2010 at 12:40 am | Permalink | Reply

     Most of the ISPs are against the filter, but few are really interested in going up against Conroy at a time when he is dead set on dismantling Telstra for them. But yes, if iiNet changed its stance, I would also consider finding a rival ISP (I am with iiNet).

     I am sure there are some customers who have switched because of ISPs supporting or not supporting the filter … but I don’t think many. Most of the early adopters who know the most about the filter are probably already with iiNet and Internode.