The Gestapo get heavy even before their fortress is complete

If they were film students, they should have been instructed to get a filming permit. Costs nothing if it is a student project. Its basic production knowledge. Though I must question the spare time of the authorities if a student film set arouses suspicion. What else cant you do in Canberra nowadays.

I think if you were to read the article in the Canberra Crimes the reason why the police were called might become a little bit understandable. It had little to do with the filming but more to do with where they were, what they were wearing and what, other than filming they may have been up to.

Russ said :

Oh, and a tip for shooting many govt. buildings – do it on a weekend or public holiday, as neither building security nor terrorists work then.

Love it !!

I do a bit of commercial architectural photography for developers, architects and drafting firms, and annoyingly, many of their buildings tend to have government tenants, so having a security guard wander up while shooting is pretty much guaranteed. As mentioned (and I’ve confirmed this with the ACT Police) there is *no* law against photographing government buildings.

The only power a security guard has is to ask you to leave if you’re standing on private land.

Oh, and a tip for shooting many govt. buildings – do it on a weekend or public holiday, as neither building security nor terrorists work then.

boo boo said :

It’s obvious that ASIO is building a secret tunnel with the exit in the shed behind the cottage. There, the cats out of the bag.

No the secret tunnel goes past the shed then up Anzac Pde to the War Memorial to a waiting spacecraft that exits through the domed roof.

Me no fry said :

If the building is so damn secret why did they build it on one of the busiest roads in Canberra. If it was stuck out in the middle of a field in, oh, lets say halfway between Queanbeyan and Bungendore, then there wouldn’t be a problem with investigating photographers.

The little steam train that runs out to Bungendore on market days runs right past it, with an elevated viewpoint for good photos…

boo boo said :

There, the cats out of the bag.

No, they’re in the drain.

It’s obvious that ASIO is building a secret tunnel with the exit in the shed behind the cottage. There, the cats out of the bag.

I heartily agree with everyone here on the stupidity and the over eagerness of a lot of contract security personnel and if you are engaged in innocent photographic pursuits then I encourage you to tell them to F*ck off! if they ask you for I.D etc etc.

Let the bastards try and apprehend you and hold you, they’ll be in for a bloody rude shock when they realise they are breaking the law, just so long as you don’t go trespassing or taking pictures through the fence there is diddly they can do about it.

I might head down there myself and gauge their reactions to some photography as I love a good laugh and welcome the opportunity to call their bluff…especially when I tell them who I am!

Sounds like I need to take my big white Canon lens and SLR out there with the tripod and snap away for an hour or two.

ConanOfCooma said :

We’re turning into lil America, well and truly.

we’ll have halloween next [ducks…]

They should’ve built it where Bimberi is – in the middle of nowhere!

Captain RAAF said :

Section 82(1) of the Defence Act 1903 (Cth) for example provides that if
(a) a person makes a sketch, drawing, photograph, picture or painting of any defence installation in Australia <snip>…
Seizure may take place without a warrant.

Section 82 definition: "defence installation" means any fort, battery, fieldwork, fortification, aircraft, air force establishment or aircraft material or any naval, military or air force work of defence.
ASIO are neither naval nor air force, are explicitly non-military, they don’t use weapons legally (so no artillery batteries onsite), they don’t make temporary fortifications (“fieldwork”), etc.

If they’re reacting this excessively to people next to major tourist attractions taking pictures with ground-level cameras (why wasn’t this thought of before?), they’re going to have a total freak out when someone points out that RC drones are going to always be a security threat, and even with a basic fitout and a low-end 1km range, you’d be looking at an actionable zone of approximately the size shown here.
One of these with a baseline DIY kit fitout has a range of over 1km even with with minor line of sight problems, and setting up a digital camera for post-flight video, or real-time video transmission is really very simple.
You can extend range if you need to, but by flying in low and fast, you’d probably only be noticed on the way out (And they have return-to-home functions by GPS, so you could take your happy snaps of ASIO and get out doubleplus quickly)…

For people who are going to mention how flying a drone above 400m or in a populated or anywhere near a restricted area isn’t legal:
You’re talking about people who want to get eyes on ASIO, legality isn’t likely to be a huge factor.

ASIO can f*** right off with the no cameras at tourist attractions bullshit, they’re the one who failed to consider that the rest of the country was using the area as a shared public space long before they decided to build there. The point of domestic spying is that nobody notices your impact if the job is being done well.

I think the correct answer to these sort of silly spygames is – FUCK OFF. If the building is so damn secret why did they build it on one of the busiest roads in Canberra. If it was stuck out in the middle of a field in, oh, lets say halfway between Queanbeyan and Bungendore, then there wouldn’t be a problem with investigating photographers.

nanzan said :

Perhaps its time for us to start going down there – en masse – and exercise our democratic right to take photographs and videos of our public buildings, which we are paying for, while standing on public land, which we have also payed for. As long as people don’t trespass on private property, then it should be of no concern at all to the police, or private security firms, or any branch of government, what buildings or building sites we choose to look at.

I’d be up for that. Saturday? we can bring a picnic. 🙂

nanzan said :

Perhaps its time for us to start going down there – en masse – and exercise our democratic right to take photographs and videos of our public buildings, which we are paying for, while standing on public land, which we have also payed for.

Get off the lawn, you ruddy kids!

I’m sure you could find a much better example than America when it comes to restrictions on photographing government buildings.

Captain RAAF said :

* any location that has temporarily been declared to be a prohibited place, including roads, railways and telecommunication infrastructure

Seizure may take place without a warrant.

Does this include Google Maps??????

I think you’ll find that in the interest of national security, anyone taking photographs or video footage of the construction of a secure building would be investigated in every instance. No matter how many people go down there ‘en masse’ I’d expect everyone to get a call and perhaps even a ‘vetting’

I once took some photos of the foot-bridge at Russell North Compound from outside the fence (of course) and was followed by security staff for a long while. The foot-bridge was new and I was taking pictures for a college architectural assignment – security and defence personel couldn’t have known this and would have had to investigate the possibility of a threat.

Perhaps they should put a blocker up between Blundell’s and the construction site so they don’t have to investigate every single photographer and tourist visiting the site.

We’re turning into lil America, well and truly.

Vwere’ are your papers? PAPERS! VWERE ARE YOU PAPERS?!

and so it begins, what a stupid place tp put this building..

If approached by a goon around any building in Australia not displaying a warning notice that photography is illegal (I don’t know of any) stand your ground and do not succumb to empty threats which are not backed up in law. The goons, security guards, cops, spooks, anyone who might be big-noting themselves or delusional, can threaten cajole warn or whatever, however they cannot lawfully order you to cease taking photos in a public place, unless they have a clear unambiguous reason to believe that the taking of the photos would be a threat to persons, property or national security.

Standing across the road from the new ASIO building and snapping a picture of the new skyline is not an offence and a reasonable person would know that there are no security implications. However if you were to walk the length of the construction site poking your camera lens through gaps in the fence etc, then you could be deemed to be acting inappropriately with security implications.

Half-witted morons and goons who work for building sites (and dare I say it the AFP as well) who think that a person standing out in the middle of a public place in broad daylight with a clearly seen camera shooting snaps is a threat to national security need to go back to kindergarten. Any organisation planning mischief that requires any sort of imagery has access to a mind-boggling array of miniature concealable high resolution still and video cameras. An innocent looking tourist strolling past the new ASIO building, stopping occasionally to look at the birds singing in the trees, is a far greater threat to our national security than anyone who has a clearly visible camera of any sort.

I guess it makes small-minded people feel important though, and that’s the critical element here, keeping up appearances. The lesson delivered by the Chaser has obviously skimmed over these people’s empty heads.

Total dumdfucks. Decide to build a massive security building in front of the lake, and then complain when people take photos. Are they going to approach everyone with a telephoto lense snapping around the lake?

Prohibitions under the national Crimes Act (Cth) and Defence Act 1903 (Cth) on trespass on Commonwealth property (including military bases and government offices) in Australia are reinforced by restrictions on photography at those locations.

Restrictions in the UK centre on images taken for a purpose “prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state” and concerning a prohibited place under the Official Secrets Act 1911. Such places include –

* military bases (aka “defence establishments”)
* munitions storage facilities
* ships, aircraft, dockyards, factories and mines belonging to the Crown
* any location that has temporarily been declared to be a prohibited place, including roads, railways and telecommunication infrastructure

Elsewhere it is common to encounter bans on photography at (or near) –

* airports (military and civil)
* seaports
* military barracks
* official offices
* court buildings
* official residences
* telephone exchanges

Those restrictions typically coexist with constraints on sketching or other creation of images. Section 82(1) of the Defence Act 1903 (Cth) for example provides that if

(a) a person makes a sketch, drawing, photograph, picture or painting of any defence installation in Australia or of any part of one; and
(b) the person has no lawful authority to do so; then:
(c) the person is guilty of an offence; and
(d) all sketches, drawings, photographs, pictures, and paintings, and all tools and all materials or apparatus for sketching, drawing, photographing or painting found in his or her possession are forfeited and may be destroyed, sold, or otherwise disposed of, as the Governor-General directs.

Seizure may take place without a warrant.

Are they for real. Blundell’s Cottage would have to be one of Canberra’s most photographed buildings. Is every tourist a possible foreign spook? Perhaps ASIO should have ‘cloaked’ the building during construction if the buildings construction is so sensitive.

Perhaps its time for us to start going down there – en masse – and exercise our democratic right to take photographs and videos of our public buildings, which we are paying for, while standing on public land, which we have also payed for. As long as people don’t trespass on private property, then it should be of no concern at all to the police, or private security firms, or any branch of government, what buildings or building sites we choose to look at.

What is the point of building a building that is supposed to make us safer as a nation, if it is the government itself – or one of its agencies – that is threatening us or challenging our rights as citizens?