Advertisement

Teepee man hates internet commenters and speaks exclusively to the tree killing media

By 30 March 2012 55

william woodbridge

Forgetting where he got his media profile from William Woodbridge now get his kicks talking exclusively to the Canberra Times and hoping that a native title certificate and $3.50 will buy him a coffee:

Canberra’s teepee man William Woodbridge has taken his fight to stay on Lake Ginninderra to the Supreme Court.

The 21-year-old lodged an interlocutory injunction with the court yesterday to stop what local Ngambri elder Shane Mortimer labelled an ”unlawful forced removal” from the floating home.

Speaking exclusively to The Canberra Times, Mr Woodbridge said he intended to defy orders by the ACT government to relocate.

[Photo by Conor Hickey]

Please login to post your comments
55 Responses to Teepee man hates internet commenters and speaks exclusively to the tree killing media
#1
Diggety1:35 am, 30 Mar 12

Along with my recent choice to identify as Aboriginal, I will now change my name to William Woodbridge.

#2
c_c2:21 am, 30 Mar 12

Spray the thing with silver paint, give it some LED lights and call it public art, can’t be worse than that thing in Woden and certainly cheaper.

#3
MJay3:17 am, 30 Mar 12

Complaining of rental costs and then going to court is somewhat amusing.

He was also on the project on Wednesday night-

http://theprojecttv.com.au/video.htm?movideo_p=39696&movideo_m=173100

#4
Felix the Cat4:23 am, 30 Mar 12

Doesn’t it cost a lot of money to take a greivance to the Supreme Court? I thought the whole reasoning behind the teepee on the lake was because he couldn’t afford student accommodation.

#5
yellowredme4:37 am, 30 Mar 12

Im behind W Woodbridge all the way. The issue is the price of student accommodation in Canberra.

#6
tommy7:10 am, 30 Mar 12

I bet he’ll be off the lake once it starts getting cold…

#7
Special G7:38 am, 30 Mar 12

Tent embassy is an ongoing protest. Can’t go removing one without removing the other.

#8
grump7:59 am, 30 Mar 12

there’s going to be tears before bedtime when the weight of the real world descends on young William and he realises that the world doesn’t revolve around him and his 15 minutes!

#9
p18:19 am, 30 Mar 12

I fail to see how he intends to claim native title on a man made (post European settlement of the continent) lake.

Maybe it’s the vibe?

#10
threepaws8:47 am, 30 Mar 12

Ok, so go ahead and protest the cost of student accommodation. But ask the government to provide you with housing? Now that’s a bit rich.

Aren’t there thousands of individuals and families already on the waiting list for housing? Does he want to jump the queue?

Perhaps he should just suck it up and do what many a struggling uni student has done before him – defer, or go part time, and get a job and support himself instead of expecting the community to give him a free ride.

I’m sure there are many people on the housing waiting list who don’t have the luxury of being able to move back in with their parents, or who can’t work.

#11
dpm8:50 am, 30 Mar 12

Sounds more like he hates RA posters’ comments, if anything.
Then again, it’s not unusual for such comments to be overly critical of almost anything…

I stumbled across this yesterday and it seems appropriate for many posts here! I guess we’re all bored and needing to feel better about ourselves! Hahahaha!
http://jezebel.com/5876891/the-art-of-hate+reading

#12
Bennop9:03 am, 30 Mar 12

Diggety said :

some of the feedback he’d received through online forums had been offensive

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/teepee-battle-heads-to-court-20120329-1w1id.html#ixzz1qXvLMypy.

Exaggerated headline much? Can do better Riot-act.

#13
Mysteryman9:15 am, 30 Mar 12

Mysteryman said :

Mr Mortimer has previously issued an ”authorisation certificate”, stating that Mr Woodbridge was ”authorised to occupy Lake Ginninderra or any other lake estuary or wetland” in Ngambri Country. The certificate was issued by Mr Mortimer on behalf of ”elders past and present”.

Does that make any difference whatsoever?

#14
6matt99:18 am, 30 Mar 12

He spent $4000 on that teepee. I’m all for taking a stand and having your voice heard but spending that sort of money defeats the purpose in my opinion.

http://canberra.realviewtechnologies.com/?iid=60118&startpage=page0000001

#15
Erg09:26 am, 30 Mar 12

Having read that article, I’m less clear than ever on his motivations for staying on the lake. First he says:
“I would like the ability to move off the lake when I find accommodation that I find suitable,” he said.

Then it changes to:
“I’m trying to raise some fairly serious issues about student accommodation and unfortunately, it takes longer than six weeks to do that.”

So is he staying because he (supposedly) can’t find suitable accommodation, or is he staying to make a statement?

#16
Rollersk8r9:50 am, 30 Mar 12

His statement has been well and truly made. Now give him the maximum $3300 fine and see how much student accomodation that could have bought him.

#17
c_c10:29 am, 30 Mar 12

Have to say Mr Woodbridge strikes me as a very simple person, certainly came across that way in the Canberra Times video. Also risks coming across as quite selfish making statements like “I would like the ability to move off the lake when I find accommodation that I find suitable.”

If he wants to make a genuine point about student housing fine, I’ll say to him what I said in a post earlier this month about student groups on student housing – be specific.

How do you define suitable? What do you want improved about student housing? If it’s price, name a figure or a percentage of income?
You obviously won’t get much, if any of it in the short term, but at least it moves the argument beyond this whiny stage.
Tens of thousands of students manage so unless he can be more specific, he’ll increasingly appear a spoilt whiner.

#18
I-filed10:34 am, 30 Mar 12

Special G said :

Tent embassy is an ongoing protest. Can’t go removing one without removing the other.

If the ACT Govt act against Woodbridge now, surely they will HAVE to do something about the five to seven cars parked daily at the Tent Embassy …

#19
devils_advocate10:44 am, 30 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

Having read that article, I’m less clear than ever on his motivations for staying on the lake. First he says:
“I would like the ability to move off the lake when I find accommodation that I find suitable,” he said.

Then it changes to:
“I’m trying to raise some fairly serious issues about student accommodation and unfortunately, it takes longer than six weeks to do that.”

So is he staying because he (supposedly) can’t find suitable accommodation, or is he staying to make a statement?

It is possible to do a given action for more than 1 reason.

#20
devils_advocate10:49 am, 30 Mar 12

I didn’t really support this fellow until he manned up and decided to take court action to enforce whatever rights he may end up having. What really makes it interesting is that the nature of the action (if I am understanding correctly) will focus on the power of the ACT to make laws restricting the ability of individuals to use certain land when they’ve been given permission by the native title claimants (rather than the interpretation of the law itself). Which is always interesting in itself.

As a proponent of the declaratory theory of law (i.e. law is set and the job of the courts is merely to declare what is is, as opposed to making the law themselves) I am interested to know the outcome of this case and how it clarifies the law.

At first I thought he was just having a whinge but now that he’s actually sticking up for himself he has my support.

#21
devils_advocate10:52 am, 30 Mar 12

I-filed said :

If the ACT Govt act against Woodbridge now, surely they will HAVE to do something about the five to seven cars parked daily at the Tent Embassy …

Good point. The law should be administered consistently. Whether this teepee ‘protest’ is more or less worthy than whatever is going on at the tent embassy is immaterial – a protest is a protest and the ACT govco should not be the self-appointed arbiter of what is and isn’t a worthy cause.

#22
Erg010:57 am, 30 Mar 12

devils_advocate said :

It is possible to do a given action for more than 1 reason.

Granted, but he can hardly expect people to believe that he’s genuinely trying to find suitable accomodation when he’s made it clear that moving off the lake is not what he really wants to do.

#23
devils_advocate11:04 am, 30 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

devils_advocate said :

It is possible to do a given action for more than 1 reason.

Granted, but he can hardly expect people to believe that he’s genuinely trying to find suitable accomodation when he’s made it clear that moving off the lake is not what he really wants to do.

I can’t honestly believe he likes living on the lake. Seriously, it would be cold and crap and getting worse as winter approaches.

I can believe he likes it more than the other available alternatives. Which really is the point here. The fact that someone would choose to live in a bloody tent on a lake than pay stupid prices for cramped student accomodation highlights that there is potentially something wrong.

I don’t believe he’s made it clear that he doesn’t want to move of the lake. He has made it clear that he will do so on his terms, and has raised a question as to the validity of actions by government seeking to force him to do so on their terms.

Now it may be that the ACT govco is legally entitled to put an end to this, and it may be that they’re not. Presumably the court action will settle that question.

#24
Erg011:16 am, 30 Mar 12

devils_advocate said :

I can’t honestly believe he likes living on the lake. Seriously, it would be cold and crap and getting worse as winter approaches.

I can believe he likes it more than the other available alternatives. Which really is the point here. The fact that someone would choose to live in a bloody tent on a lake than pay stupid prices for cramped student accomodation highlights that there is potentially something wrong.

The thing is, at this point he’s not living on the lake because he likes it or because he has no other options. He’s doing it to make a point, and says as much in the second quote in my post above.

All the “I’ll move as soon as I can find an alternative” stuff is just a smokescreen for his actual intent, which is to remain a pain in the government’s backside until he’s satisfied that his message has been spread effectively. I’m not really pro- or anti-teepee, as I’ve never had experience of student accommodation, but I’ve never been fond of smartarses who think they can pull the wool over people’s eyes. If he’s doing it to make a point, he should just own it.

#25
dazzab11:20 am, 30 Mar 12

“Forgetting where he got his media profile from William Woodbridge now get his kicks talking exclusively to the Canberra Times and hoping that a native title certificate and $3.50 will buy him a coffee”

Professional balanced reporting there. Not. But as your bylines states, you get to write the news anyway you see fit. Reader beware.

#26
pink little birdie11:23 am, 30 Mar 12

devils_advocate said :

What really makes it interesting is that the nature of the action (if I am understanding correctly) will focus on the power of the ACT to make laws restricting the ability of individuals to use certain land when they’ve been given permission by the native title claimants (rather than the interpretation of the law itself). Which is always interesting in itself.
/quote]

Actually why did he get Ngambi Elder permission? Ngambi is generally southern Canberra. Ngunnawal land is the Northern parts of Canberra, the boarder of the land groups is roughly along the Molongalo. Either way it is heavily in dispute but the ACT Government currently regognises Ngunnawal Elders as the Traditional owners of Canberra.

Also I’m fairly sure the majority of Canberra and lakes are exluded from people trying to claim Native Title on it.

#27
Erg011:31 am, 30 Mar 12

Incidentally, the easy resolution to this is for the ACT govt to offer him a cosy little two-bedder in O’Connor. If he refuses it then he’s a liar, if he takes it then he’s a sellout.

#28
HenryBG12:54 pm, 30 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

devils_advocate said :

I can’t honestly believe he likes living on the lake. Seriously, it would be cold and crap and getting worse as winter approaches.

I can believe he likes it more than the other available alternatives. Which really is the point here. The fact that someone would choose to live in a bloody tent on a lake than pay stupid prices for cramped student accomodation highlights that there is potentially something wrong.

The thing is, at this point he’s not living on the lake because he likes it or because he has no other options. He’s doing it to make a point, and says as much in the second quote in my post above.

All the “I’ll move as soon as I can find an alternative” stuff is just a smokescreen for his actual intent, which is to remain a pain in the government’s backside until he’s satisfied that his message has been spread effectively. I’m not really pro- or anti-teepee, as I’ve never had experience of student accommodation, but I’ve never been fond of smartarses who think they can pull the wool over people’s eyes. If he’s doing it to make a point, he should just own it.

By building a teepee, going to court and speaking to the media, it is fairly evidence that he is “trying to make a point”.

Can you clarify whatever it is you object to, precisely?

TeePee-man is doing the right thing – authority should always be challenged to ensure we keep our freedoms.

And the fact that a bunch of campers outside OPH aren’t being moved on gives him grounds for objecting to selective application of the law, selective application of the law being the first telltale sign of corrupt government.

#29
devils_advocate1:29 pm, 30 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

Incidentally, the easy resolution to this is for the ACT govt to offer him a cosy little two-bedder in O’Connor. If he refuses it then he’s a liar, if he takes it then he’s a sellout.

Um, if the government hands out accomodation in o’connor (which would have to at least be subsidised to be acceptable to him) then they’d have to do it for every student, which is hardly easy.

#30
devils_advocate1:30 pm, 30 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

… selective application of the law being the first telltale sign of corrupt government.

Unfortunately for us, this wouldn’t be the first telltale sign, not by a long shot. But a telltale sign, nonetheless.

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement

Are you in favour of Light Rail for Canberra?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.