In the second instalment of this two-part series, Federal IT Minister Senator Richard Alston talks exclusively to ZDNet Australia about Internet censorship, tackling spam and his future in the IT portfolio.

ZDNet Australia: Do you consider the Government's content regulation legislation a success?

Alston: I don't think anyone ever pretended that you were going to achieve perfection, any more than a law banning murder means there are no more murders being committed. But if the principal purpose it to try and make the mainstream a bit safer, well I think it does achieve that. I mean, it gives people a degree of comfort but does that mean that smart young kids can't get around it? No. But is that an argument for doing nothing? No. So, given that, you are trying to achieve a balance without interrupting the flow of the Internet.

How would you respond to critics who contend that the legislation is holding the Australian IT industry back by putting us on level terms with heavily-censored countries like China?

Well put it this way: No IT company or senior executive has ever raised that issue. The only people that ever raise it are journalists. I remember being in Silicon Valley when a journalist asked me that at a big forum. There were plenty of IT companies around and they all sort of looked at me and said, 'don't tell me they're running that stuff'. All that tells you is that it's an interesting issue to run hypothetically but it doesn't make the slightest difference to the industry - they are not interested in being associated with a porn business or the paedophile networks or anything else.

If it's not slowing the Web down, then they don't have a problem. If you asked any of them, they would probably be very supportive for social policy reasons. I think it's just one of those issues that people have fun with in the media. You get a Libertarian group that says 'you just don't get it'. What we've been saying over the last five years is that most other countries have pretty much the same view as we do.

What about spam? Are there any plans to legislate against that?

Apart from people wringing their hands about the issue, I don't recall offhand any specific proposals that people are saying we could easily implement that will dramatically reduce the problem.

What's standing in the way of a Government-led solution to the spam problem facing Australian businesses and individuals?

It is incredibly cheap for someone to disseminate spam to thousands of recipients who don't want it. It's cost-free and that's always a problem. If there's a pain threshold it's much easier. Someone did come to see me - Sean Howard, who used to be at OzEmail - he had some simple spam solution. It looks as though it's going to involve the market which is probably the way it ought to be.

Do you view spam as a serious problem that requires Government intervention?

If it's interfering with the critical infrastructure I suppose yes, but if it's interfering with normal commerce - well, you do what you can. But you don't want draconian solutions that are worse than the problem. It's a nuisance at the moment but if it started to clog up the system then we might have a very different view.

Some commentators suggest that you are looking after the IT ministry under protest. Are you happy in the IT portfolio?

Is that right? I haven't heard that. I think it's a natural fit with Communications, so I think it was a very good move that we made. I certainly would resist the proposition that it could be 'hived off'. In some ways it fits within a broader innovation portfolio but at the end of the day, you can't bring everything under one mega-portfolio. To me it's one of the more interesting aspects, particularly since the telco and dot-com crash. Trying to get the IT sector moving in various ways I think is a very exciting challenge.

Will you be satisfied in this portfolio for the duration of the Coalition's stay in power?

Ultimately it's not my call. As far as I'm concerned it's a great space to play in and I'm more than happy to keep doing this work.

Many people in this industry would like to have an ex-IT Minister installed as the Prime Minister. Do you have designs on the top job?

[Laughs] I did read that the ACS (Australian Computer Society) is promoting the fact that not every Cabinet Minister was a wild enthusiast for IT. The fact is, everyone would like to think they're at the centre of the universe in policy terms. If issues arise and you can win through on them, then it doesn't really matter in a sense if your colleagues don't have the same level of enthusiasm.

Obviously, terrorism, economy etc are key election issues. DO you think the Coalition would win the next election if it was based purely on IT issues of the major parties?

All you can say is 'are our policies better than our opponents?'. We had a debate on that before the last election. I found out then that Brian Greig was the Democrats' [IT] spokesman, so that tells you how much he's added to the debate. Kate Lundy, well Kate made an announcement then and she back-tracked on it 24 hours later. She guaranteed that 50 percent of outsourcing would go to SMEs then had to change her mind. I don't think anyone would be saying that the Labor Party had superior IT policies. As often happens these days, the Opposition is in the business of criticising and finding fault and that's fair enough. Were there any superior alternatives? No. Did the industry ever complain that we should have been doing something fundamentally different? No.

The ACS, the AIIA and various other groups were very supportive I think. Even the old Internet Industry Association begrudgingly had to concede that maybe we weren't that bad after all. Maybe we didn't win over Electronic Frontiers.

Are you still trying to win Electronic Frontiers over?

No, we gave up on them a long time ago.

You've personally attracted quite a bit of criticism throughout your tenure in the IT portfolio, with some suggesting that you don't truly understand technology and the benefits it can provide to business and individuals. What is your response to those critics?

It's very hard to respond to general statements. If anyone can point to specific areas of policy where it can be demonstrated there is a better approach, we'd be more than happy to follow it.

Copyright © 2009 CBS Interactive, a CBS Company. All Rights Reserved.
ZDNET is a registered service mark of CBS Interactive. ZDNET Logo is a service mark of CBS Interactive.