ELSPA - the European Leisure Software Publishers Association - celebrates its 10th anniversary this year, and this column is dedicated to one of its more valuable initiatives which was launched five years ago this week.

ELSPA, if you're unaware of it, exists to further the interests of its members - the majority of the UK's games publishers - which, by definition, means it's constantly promoting and defending the entire games industry. It's most well known for its anti-piracy activities, having a dedicated Crime Unit which last month alone performed 102 raids, and its Voluntary Age Rating System, those little 'tick' boxes stuck on software packaging. The initiative five years ago was A Parent's Guide to Computer and Video Games, a leaflet that was published by ELSPA and made available to the public in just about every retailer that sold games. Over two million were printed and distributed in the period up until Christmas.

At the time there were certain trendies within the industry who poured scorn on this initiative, labeling it an example of ELSPA being an over-anxious 'nanny', but it was one of the smartest things the trade association had ever done, and here's why. The government of the day were weak and coming under increasing pressure from their own backbenchers, not to mention certain sections of the tabloid press, to 'do something' about all the 'senseless violence' that 'our children' were being exposed to in computer games. ELSPA's leaflet calmly and authoritatively explained the benefits of playing computer and videogames and addressed the three main concerns of the ignorant: whether games were too addictive, too violent or caused epilepsy (no, no and no, in case you were wondering!). There were violent games, conceded the guide, but these only made up a tiny minority of the industry's output and had an '18' rating anyway.

Largely as a result of this leaflet, and ELSPA's Voluntary Age Rating System, the government turned its attention to other vote-winning causes and left the computer and videogames industry to its own devices. If that sounds as impressive as a hill of beans, it should be noted that many influential voices were calling for all games to be rated in the same way as video and cinema releases, via the BBFC. If that had been forced on the industry, massive extra costs would have been passed on to the consumer and games with 'controversial' elements would have suffered huge delays. As an example, it's widely believed that when SCI submitted its first Carmageddon title to the BBFC, the game sat in a draw for six weeks before anyone looked at it - and that it was only dug out after the publisher had demanded to know how the game was progressing through the ratings system.

When they did try to look at it, no-one at the BBFC could install it, let alone play it...