Topic: Update on UK #10 photo petition - it's a bunch of hooey!

[Susan B.]

My friend Miles just sent this. Thought I'd post this for all you UK filmwasters...

There was a news story on this in the current issue of  the UK magazine
'Amateur Photographer'.

"No. 10 petition sparks confusion"

"A photographers petition against 'proposed restrictions' on taking pictures
in public has confused many into wrongly believing that the government is
planning such a move. AP has learned that the petition... ...was largely
fuelled by a photo enthusiast's idea to launch a self-styled ID card and has
nothing to do with future government policy whatsoever."

It goes on...

"However, the petition's wording has confused some photographers, who have
contacted AP fearing that the government is planning to announce new
restrictions on photography in public, such as the need to carry an ID card.
It isn't."

[LT]

good bit of detective work susan, and I was duped into signing it.  I expect my house is bugged and I'm down as a dissident in some secret service file

[This-is-damion]

i posted about this in the other thread!

Just in case you havent seen it...

if you read his website you can see the background to the petition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hello
Having just read the webiste of the man who set this petition up, seems this might be all a bit over the top -dont get me wrong I totally agree with the sentiment, but as he states -there is no such bill in the offering. 

You can read his webiste   here http://phooto.co.uk/rights.shtml




"These are the reasons why I have raised the petition at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Photography/, and although there is no bill in the offing, it is vitally important that politicians such as Mr Livingston are fully aware of the basic rights UK citizens have, and that changes to restrict our use of cameras would require very fundamental changes in UK law. "

[LT]

whoops - sorry D.  I missed that 

[FrankB]

Hooey it may be, and granted there's no planned bill, but there is still an issue...

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_AP_staff_amid_terrorism_fears_news_112764.html

Sign of the times? Reasonable precautions? Something we have to live with? Or unjustified intrusion?

Take your pick. 

[Ed Wenn]

I agree with Frank. I read D's post a while ago and even before that I was aware that there wasn't a bill actually planned, but I still signed the petition because I am getting sick and tired of being told that I can't take photos around the City of London (mainly by office building security guards). It really winds me up. Would a terrorist stand in broad daylight snapping away with an old analogue camera? Erm, no.

If I get told one more time, "You'll have to delete that last shot", I'll get velly, velly angry.

[FrankB]

Another outbreak of peaked-cappedness, but I'm posting this one as it's actually quite funny (well I think so anyway!). I've taken it from the Amateur Photographer news page -

A bishop was stopped and questioned by security officers while he was being photographed in Corby town centre in Northamptonshire without seeking prior permission.

We understand that the incident occurred while the Right Reverend Frank White, who is the Bishop of Brixworth, was being shown around Corby's new buildings by a member of the local council on 8 March.

Jim Wade, the photography enthusiast who was taking pictures for inclusion in a 'diocesan newsletter', told us: 'The guard asked the bishop: 'Who are you?' His reply: 'I am the Bishop of Brixworth' was met with an unbelieving glare.'

The guard added: 'You are not allowed to be here without permission. This town centre is private land and pictures cannot be taken.'

The bishop was then escorted to an office 'for vetting,' by 'senior security staff'', said Wade who joined the party.

Land Securities - the company that owns the shopping area and 29 others nationwide - admitted that the security officer may have been a 'bit overzealous' and has pledged to investigate the incident.

Expressing apologies to the bishop a spokeswoman told us: 'We are not trying to be unhelpful… Normally we would give permission.' She added that it is not the company's policy to stop people taking photographs.

She said that photographers should seek permission before visiting its shopping areas, for 'health and safety' reasons.

She explained that prior notice allows staff to know who will be visiting and what equipment they will be carrying with them, so that they don't cause any undue obstructions. 'Should there be a fire, we are responsible,' she told us.

[Karl]

I read an article a few months ago about someone who was taking photos in westminster/central london and was 'threatened' by 'security' staff and told that they had to confiscate his camera and equipment. The problem was that they weren't security, but running a scam.

Another thread pointed me to Simon Norfolk's website - www.simonnorfolk.com - it is interesting to read his experiences in the Bush/Kerry Election project (hit link on homepage). Beware, you are probably being watched, although doesn't street photography involve doing the same, albeit with different values?

[Francois]

To sum it up with a smile ...

[Ed Wenn]

Just got this email from my government. What a cracker...especially when you consider the confusion around why we were signing it in the first place. Seems to me though that this is an easy one for them to answer, so they did just that. More complex issues probably won't get a response as quickly and clearly as this.

E-Petition: response from the Government
The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to "Stop proposed restrictions regarding photography in public places" is on-going. This is a response in advance of the closing date from the Government.

Thank you for signing the petition on the Downing Street website calling for the Prime Minister to stop proposed restrictions on photography in public places.

This petition has already attracted over 60,000 signatures from people who obviously share your concern. Not surprisingly, the idea that the Government might be poised to restrict your ability to take photos has caused some puzzlement and even alarm.

We have therefore decided to respond to this petition before its closing date of August, in order to reassure people.

The Government appreciates that millions of people in this country enjoy photography. So we have checked carefully to see if any Government department was considering any proposal that might possibly lead to the sort of restrictions suggested by this petition. We have been assured this is not the case.

There may be cases where individual schools or other bodies believe it is necessary to have some restrictions on photography, for instance to protect children, but that would be a matter for local decisions.

In fact, Simon Taylor, who started the petition, has since made clear that he was not really referring to Government action or legislation. His main concern appears to be that photographic societies and other organisations may introduce voluntary ID cards for members to help them explain why they are taking photographs. Again, any such scheme would not involve the Government.

We hope this re-assures you and clears up the confusion.

[david b]

You get an official reply to every petition - several from the PM on contentious issues, largely along the lines of "here's why we won't take any notice of you". His reply to the ID cards petition made me want to throw things.