"One may wonder exactly what underlies this relentless pursuit of a mirage, given that there is just about zero support outside the cabinet," said Landfeldt. "Surely it is no longer a matter of believing that the policy would benefit the general public." The government is preparing to introduce legislation forcing ISPs to block a blacklist of websites that have been "refused classification" (RC) by government bureaucrats. After intense criticism of the policy, including that "refused classification" included innocuous and politically sensitive material, Senator Conroy announced just before the election that his policy would be delayed until a review of RC classification guidelines could be conducted by state and territory censorship ministers. This effectively means any internet filtering legislation will be delayed until next year, by which time the Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate. The Greens have already said they would oppose the legislation, as has the Opposition.

But before it gets to the Senate the legislation would need to pass the House of Representatives, meaning Labor would need the support of Greens MP Adam Bandt and the independents Andrew Wilkie, Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor and Bob Katter. Wilkie, Windsor and Katter could not be reached for comment but a spokesman for Oakeshott said he was against the filter. In fact, last year Oakeshott helped a teenage campaigner in his electorate with a petition arguing the filter should be scrapped. "It is not the government's role to be a net nanny. It is the role of every single household," Oakeshott told the Port Macquarie News at the time. Senator Ludlam said in a phone interview that he wanted the review of RC guidelines to still go ahead but the government should drop the internet filtering policy altogether.

"It [the RC review] was quite transparently a political stalling tactic but that didn't make it a bad idea," he said. "[The filter] is just a complete waste of chamber time. It's a waste of public servants' time who for the next 10 months are going to be progressing a mandatory filter proposal that has no chance of passing either house of parliament now." Senator Ludlam said Senator Conroy should "get past this fixation" with the filter and turn his attention to other looming issues such as net neutrality and the Attorney-General's data retention proposal. The data retention proposal is being pushed by the Australian Federal Police and could see all web browsing history of Australian internet users logged for law enforcement to access. A wide range of experts on the internet and child protection have long argued that a mandatory filter would be ineffective as it was easy to bypass, would not capture even a small percentage of the nasty content on the web and would give parents a false sense of security. The big ISPs, including Optus, Telstra and iPrimus, have already pledged to block child-abuse websites voluntarily. This narrower, voluntary approach has long been advocated by internet experts and brings Australia into line with other countries such as Britain.

The Opposition pledged to bring back free voluntary PC-based internet filters for families, which existed under the Howard government but were scrapped by Senator Conroy to make way for his mandatory ISP-level filter. "Recent OECD reports tell us the investment and quality of our higher education system is falling behind other developed countries; with the ludicrous house prices Australians can no longer move out of home, etc," said Landfeldt. "There is no shortage of important issues and challenges for the government to focus on." Despite the intense opposition, Senator Conroy is pushing ahead with the filter and has revealed "a suite of transparency measures to accompany the policy and ensure people can have faith in the RC content list", a spokeswoman said. "The government does not support Refused Classification material being available on the internet. This material includes child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence and detailed instruction in crime," she said.