DSLRUsers.com

Only in Sydney

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20 ... 21,00.html

Fair dinkum - what is this country coming to?

In my opinion, we need a bill of rights in this country before councils such as the one featured in the story, take over our private lives.

Quote "Anyone conducting any act on public space is obliged to apply for a permit," Ms McDonald said. "It's a policy of Waverley Council as caretakers of public space." Unquote

I'd like to apply to the Waverky council for a permit so that I can give the council the raspberry it so thoroughly deserves.

If you live in Sydney, you should read the article.

Regards

Graham (Canky as can be)

I find this very interesting.....

bago100 wrote:Quote "Anyone conducting any act on public space is obliged to apply for a permit," Ms McDonald said. "It's a policy of Waverley Council as caretakers of public space." Unquote

Maybe I'm being a bit pedantic about the terminology but I wonder how "an act" is EXACTLY defined by the council. As found in the Macquarie dictionary, an act could be....

'anything done or performed' or 'to do something; to exert energy' (just to name a few).

Now either of these would mean that anybody doing anything in a public place needs a permit. I'll have to remember to apply for a permit next time I plan to do some shopping down there.

On the other hand, I would like to see the actual documentation or release that the Council have/made on this as I'm sure most people know, the media is not always completely accurate.

First I thought this was some April fools joke but... how redicolous can it get?

What if you disobey? Fines for taking public photos?

A Manly Council spokesman called the policies "extraordinary". "It's Waverley, not North Korea," he said.

Well said...
Boycot Waverly I say!

Lets not get overly excited by this. What they banned was the act of stopping people in the street to conduct a survey, which was being also photographed by a staff of the same paper conducting the survey.

I agree that it is quite draconian but it was not necessarily the act of taking the photo that was banned. It was the act of conducting the survey which also happened to have a photographer involved.

Those that need to be worried are the ones doing surveys on the sidewalks/malls, etc.

That the way I read it anyway but YMMV

Cheers,

André

Andre,

Yes, except for this minor point ...

"Anyone conducting any act on public space is obliged to apply for a permit," Ms McDonald said. "It's a policy of Waverley Council as caretakers of public space."

This is unqualifed ... what, exactly, is an act?

Living in Waverley ward, I have placed a call to one of my representatives, the Deputy Mayor. I am awaiting a callback, and I'm going to ask him how I can get a permit to allow me to perform the following acts ...

walking on a street

using an ATM

breathing

thinking

driving

making photographs

I will also be asking if the same restrictions are to be placed upon tourists in the area who may be doing any of the above acts.

gstark wrote:

"Anyone conducting any act on public space is obliged to apply for a permit," Ms McDonald said. "It's a policy of Waverley Council as caretakers of public space."

This is unqualifed ... what, exactly, is an act?

Agreed, they do need to qualify "act", certainly leaves it open ended.

André

I’m going to apply for a masturbation permit

I'll apply for a permit to get photos of you doing that, Chris. Not sure what it adds to the public record, but it'll definitely be an event...

sirhc55 wrote:I’m going to apply for a masturbation permit

but you will need a permit to photograph that.......

sirhc55 wrote:I’m going to apply for a masturbation permit

Sorry, Chris.

The council has aready cornered the market on those.

gstark wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:I’m going to apply for a masturbation permit

Sorry, Chris.

The council has aready cornered the market on those.

Oh! You mean all of those ”wankers” in power

sirhc55 wrote:

gstark wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:I’m going to apply for a masturbation permit

Sorry, Chris.

The council has aready cornered the market on those.

Oh! You mean all of those ”wankers” in power

That's not what I said.

What a crock of sh!t!

No council ranger would be telling me to 'move along'.

NSW Police can only issue a 'move along' direction under the Summary Offences Act if the person is causing a disruption, blocking a footpath or acting in a manner likely to cause fear in the mind of a reasonable person (whether or not that person is actually there).

Under the Summary Offences Act the 'blocking a footpath' aspect would require far more that a person stopping to take a photograph. It is more concerned with a group or gang blocking a footpath and loitering.

The Council may be relying upon the definition of 'nuisance' under the Local Government Act. I still think that this definition does not offer enough for the Council to take against someone taking photos.

"Nuisance consists of interference with the enjoyment of public or private rights in a variety of ways. A nuisance is “public” if it materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of a sufficient class of people to constitute the public or a section of the public. For example, any wrongful or negligent act or omission in a public road that interferes with the full, safe and convenient use by the public of their right of passage is a public nuisance."

A person stopping to take a photo does not affect the 'reasonable comfort' of a person. To put it bluntly, Council does not have the power to enforce this by-law.

I would be sorely tempted to argue the toss with a Bondi Council Ranger and say "If you want me to move along, then you call the Police and I will move along IF they tell me to". I would also take any infringement notice issued to court and argue it at Court. When I won (not if) I would take the Council for my legal costs also.

Council may state "it is Council 'policy'" however, I can assure any one that Policy plays second fiddle to 'legislation'.

More legislation can be found in the Local Government Act, 1943. Part 2. Giving of Orders. Section 125.

Tell them to stick it up their ass!

Alan,

Raskill wrote:Tell them to stick it up their ass!

I'm not sure that, with their heads so far up there, there would be more room left.

A Manly Council spokesman called the policies "extraordinary". "It's Waverley, not North Korea," he said.

I always wondered what was in some weird structures at the park near the council... and now I know.

Nukes.

Waverly Council has WMD's.

I am going to apply for a permit to Carry a Concealed D2x Magnum
in a shoulder holster by LowePro

I wonder how this would affect tourism in Sydney and how these news items, which without doubt will be published abroad, will be seen by the world. Personally I feel that anybody should be able to take photographs in a public place, unless that action constitutes a physical danger to the public or the photographer, and in cases when the subject himself/herself objects to the picture being taken. I also started to wonder about the IQ level of the people who are currently running this country for it seems that the idiots and the mentally deficient have invaded all levels of government council, state, and federal!

'Takes all kinds to make a world.'

Quite funny really.

The question is, does this only apply to rate payers of Waverly council area? Can a tourist legally ask a local for directions?

You have to feel sorry for those council workers. Imagine the workload they will get when everyone starts applying for permits.

I feel like flying down to press buttons of council rangers in Waverly just to see how far I can press it. Not many council rangers (cop wannabes) would likely be ballsy enough to try me but I'd really enjoy the challenge. (mind you - half the cops I meet while working assume I'm also on the job for a different agency)

Cant wait to tell my mate with the anti-terrorism branch about this - he'll likely go visit and take pics in an obnoxious way just to press buttons. lol

The mayor informs me that the story is a beat up, and that there is no such policy within the council area.

I have asked him to verify whether the council spokesperson mentioned in the article has confirmed that she made these statements, and if so, why.

have to wonder if it is a beat up or if it's really their way of trying to dampen reaction to what they now know to be a stupid council decision.

wouldn't be the first time I've seen a NewsLTD paper journo go over the top with that kind of reporting but it alsop wouldnt be the first time I'd seen a council try to cover tracks with BS as well.... now will it be the last.

Mark,

Exactly, which is whay I have asked the further questions I have of the mayor.

If it's a beat up - which I would find very plausible, then from where did the quote come? It's inconsistant with the report being a beat up.

That means that if the quote, as quoted, is accurate, but if the mayor alos holds true to his statement that there is no such council policy, I would expect to see some sort of declaration to that effect by the mayor, along with a statement suggesting that the council staffer concerned will be handled in an appropriate manner.

gstark wrote:I am awaiting a callback, and I'm going to ask him how I can get a permit to allow me to perform the following acts ...

walking on a street

using an ATM

breathing

thinking

driving

making photographs

Gee, Gary, that's a long list. I doubt you pay enough taxes to qualify for such a wide-ranging permit.

Cheers
Steffen.