Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

Boot Camp Culture. Should they pay for the space they use? [With poll]

By G-Fresh 5 December 2011 77

Do rioters think that boot camps should be regulated?

Sydney councils have commenced regulation of the industry.

Should boot camp businesses be required to pay taxes for their ‘use of public places in gaining assessable income’?

This is whats happening in Sydney: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/aggressive-militarystyle-training-squads-in-parks-get-marching-orders-20111204-1odfb.html

Bootcamps in parks

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
77 Responses to
Boot Camp Culture. Should they pay for the space they use? [With poll]
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Ex Warrior 7:50 am 09 Dec 11

Well what does it all mean????

Clause 40 – What is a public unleased land permit?
This clause defines a public unleased land permit as meaning a permit that authorises the
permit?holder to exclusively use the stated public unleased land (the permitted public
unleased land), at a stated time (the permitted time), and for a stated activity (the
permitted activity).
Clause 41 – When does a person use public unleased land?—Pt 3
This clause defines the use of public unleased land. A person uses public unleased land if the
person carries on an activity on the public unleased land in a way that excludes some or all
members of the public from the place. Examples of using public unleased land include:
placing tables and chairs on the footpath outside a cafe, placing a construction skip on a
footpath, placing a charity bin on a footpath, holding markets on unleased land, holding a
concert in a park, holding a wedding in a park and parking a car in a park.

Erg0 4:43 pm 07 Dec 11

devils_advocate said :

qbngeek said :

Meh, go sit in the middle of them with your lunch. Worked for me when they took over the little park where several of us eat lunch in Woden. I sat in the middle of their group and ate my sandwiches, then read my book for about 40 mins. Did it for a week, the operator got the shits and had a go at me and I advised them it was a public park adn it is tiny.

That’s kind of lame. People forget that regardless of legal entitlements, there is still a thing called common courtesy. I mean the finance and treasury people regularly take over the park between the two buildings for the yearly soccer comp, and then also regular football/oztag games I observe there, I suppose you think it would be fine to sit in the middle of a soccer game and ruin people’s enjoyment for your own smug amusement?

Common courtesy works in both directions – how would you like it if a business came along and took away your access to a public space that you used on a regular basis?

And you could hardly say the finance and treasury people “take over” that park, it’s freakin’ huge and they leave plenty of space for others to use it.

qbngeek 4:42 pm 07 Dec 11

devils_advocate said :

qbngeek said :

Meh, go sit in the middle of them with your lunch. Worked for me when they took over the little park where several of us eat lunch in Woden. I sat in the middle of their group and ate my sandwiches, then read my book for about 40 mins. Did it for a week, the operator got the shits and had a go at me and I advised them it was a public park adn it is tiny.

That’s kind of lame. People forget that regardless of legal entitlements, there is still a thing called common courtesy. I mean the finance and treasury people regularly take over the park between the two buildings for the yearly soccer comp, and then also regular football/oztag games I observe there, I suppose you think it would be fine to sit in the middle of a soccer game and ruin people’s enjoyment for your own smug amusement?

Do they do it everyday of the week, in a place where many people eat lunch, when there is no alternative park area with seating, between 12 noon and 2pm when most people go to lunch.

If it was once or twice a week I would have let them be. If they used a small part of the park, instead of having equipment strewn over the whole thing, I would have let them be. If they had shown a little bit of courtesy to other people, I would have let them be. If the instructor wasn’t a cock, I would have let them be. If they did it outside the busy lunch times, I would have let them be. And don’t argue they have to do it then because it is lunch and people could be off work, I am yet to work somewhere that won’t let you to lunch at 11am or 2pm so you can do something. I used to take luinch at 2pm everyday for about 6 months to go for a walk when there was minimal foot traffic around.

Henry82 3:58 pm 07 Dec 11

devils_advocate said :

People forget that regardless of legal entitlements, there is still a thing called common courtesy. I mean the finance and treasury people regularly take over the park between the two buildings for the yearly soccer comp,…

Do the finance and treasury department pay to play soccer?

devils_advocate 3:29 pm 07 Dec 11

qbngeek said :

Meh, go sit in the middle of them with your lunch. Worked for me when they took over the little park where several of us eat lunch in Woden. I sat in the middle of their group and ate my sandwiches, then read my book for about 40 mins. Did it for a week, the operator got the shits and had a go at me and I advised them it was a public park adn it is tiny.

That’s kind of lame. People forget that regardless of legal entitlements, there is still a thing called common courtesy. I mean the finance and treasury people regularly take over the park between the two buildings for the yearly soccer comp, and then also regular football/oztag games I observe there, I suppose you think it would be fine to sit in the middle of a soccer game and ruin people’s enjoyment for your own smug amusement?

Funky1 2:05 pm 07 Dec 11

qbngeek said :

Gungahlin Al said :

I haven’t read back through 66 comments on this thread already, so sorry if it’s already been hashed to death. But recently I have seen such classes running in the tiny Veterans Park in Civic at lunch time. Surely that’s not on? Such a small and heavily used park at its peak usage time being half used by this commercial operator?

Meh, go sit in the middle of them with your lunch. Worked for me when they took over the little park where several of us eat lunch in Woden. I sat in the middle of their group and ate my sandwiches, then read my book for about 40 mins. Did it for a week, the operator got the shits and had a go at me and I advised them it was a public park adn it is tiny. Told him it was inappropriate for them to use the only place around with chairs (they were using the chairs as well) and grass. He told me if I did it again he would knock me out.

The following Monday, went for lunch and did it again with two other people. The operator yelled and screamed for a bit, then stormed off. Never saw them again.

And that’s why these guys at least need to register their use of an area, even if there is no fee. At least then they can be reported for inappropriate behaviour. You didn’t note any business name or signage did you??

Funky1 1:58 pm 07 Dec 11

Deref said :

devils_advocate said :

Deref said :

Slightly off-topic, but related. “Boot camp” operators get to use publicly-owned facilities at no charge. But people who want to use publicly-owned facilities like a hall have to pay rental and take out a $20M insurance policy. WTF?

Well it’s excludable. Once you put walls and a door around a space it becomes possible to make people pay for using that space – so they do. It’s more difficult to regulate and limit use of an open public space that anyone can access.

As for the $20m policy, it would seem to make more sense for the owner of the building to take out public liability insurance and then roll that into the price of the letting fee, unless there’s soome specific risk with the use you are putting it to.

thoroughly aggree. The owner is the ACT Government – or at least they manage it on behalf of us.

The same goes for sporting bodies hiring ovals. They must have their own public liability cover in place beforehand.

How many of these boot camp operators have their own PL cover and how would you know if they didn’t and you injured yourself due to their actions or equipment?

qbngeek 1:52 pm 07 Dec 11

Gungahlin Al said :

I haven’t read back through 66 comments on this thread already, so sorry if it’s already been hashed to death. But recently I have seen such classes running in the tiny Veterans Park in Civic at lunch time. Surely that’s not on? Such a small and heavily used park at its peak usage time being half used by this commercial operator?

Meh, go sit in the middle of them with your lunch. Worked for me when they took over the little park where several of us eat lunch in Woden. I sat in the middle of their group and ate my sandwiches, then read my book for about 40 mins. Did it for a week, the operator got the shits and had a go at me and I advised them it was a public park adn it is tiny. Told him it was inappropriate for them to use the only place around with chairs (they were using the chairs as well) and grass. He told me if I did it again he would knock me out.

The following Monday, went for lunch and did it again with two other people. The operator yelled and screamed for a bit, then stormed off. Never saw them again.

Funky1 1:46 pm 07 Dec 11

devils_advocate said :

Holden Caulfield said :

I also think a modest blanket fee for Boot Camp operators to pay is a sensible approach.

In theory. But as noted above, then you have to pass a law to mandate the collection of the fee, have some agency be responsible for doing so, also for administering/explaining the rules, interpreting them, and of course some kind of legal sanction for people that don’t pay it, and some mechanism for enforcing it.

End of the day it’s people using a public space, how much effort do you want to go to in policing this stuff. We should be glad someone is getting use out of it.

Also reducing the number of fatties generates a public good that these trainers don’t capture the economic benefit of, so its a positive externality. Let’s say we don’t compensate them for that, and don’t tax them for the use of the commons, and call it even.

Actually no need for any new legislation but perhaps just to amend the existing legistation that relates to the hiring of sporting ovals etc. Therefore the agency already exists that can manage this function too. Should be quite easy to do and to maintain.

Deref 1:35 pm 07 Dec 11

devils_advocate said :

Deref said :

Slightly off-topic, but related. “Boot camp” operators get to use publicly-owned facilities at no charge. But people who want to use publicly-owned facilities like a hall have to pay rental and take out a $20M insurance policy. WTF?

Well it’s excludable. Once you put walls and a door around a space it becomes possible to make people pay for using that space – so they do. It’s more difficult to regulate and limit use of an open public space that anyone can access.

As for the $20m policy, it would seem to make more sense for the owner of the building to take out public liability insurance and then roll that into the price of the letting fee, unless there’s soome specific risk with the use you are putting it to.

thoroughly aggree. The owner is the ACT Government – or at least they manage it on behalf of us.

Gungahlin Al 1:18 pm 07 Dec 11

I haven’t read back through 66 comments on this thread already, so sorry if it’s already been hashed to death. But recently I have seen such classes running in the tiny Veterans Park in Civic at lunch time. Surely that’s not on? Such a small and heavily used park at its peak usage time being half used by this commercial operator?

devils_advocate 11:48 am 07 Dec 11

Deref said :

Slightly off-topic, but related. “Boot camp” operators get to use publicly-owned facilities at no charge. But people who want to use publicly-owned facilities like a hall have to pay rental and take out a $20M insurance policy. WTF?

Well it’s excludable. Once you put walls and a door around a space it becomes possible to make people pay for using that space – so they do. It’s more difficult to regulate and limit use of an open public space that anyone can access.

As for the $20m policy, it would seem to make more sense for the owner of the building to take out public liability insurance and then roll that into the price of the letting fee, unless there’s soome specific risk with the use you are putting it to.

Deref 11:23 am 07 Dec 11

Slightly off-topic, but related. “Boot camp” operators get to use publicly-owned facilities at no charge. But people who want to use publicly-owned facilities like a hall have to pay rental and take out a $20M insurance policy. WTF?

devils_advocate 11:02 am 07 Dec 11

Holden Caulfield said :

I also think a modest blanket fee for Boot Camp operators to pay is a sensible approach.

In theory. But as noted above, then you have to pass a law to mandate the collection of the fee, have some agency be responsible for doing so, also for administering/explaining the rules, interpreting them, and of course some kind of legal sanction for people that don’t pay it, and some mechanism for enforcing it.

End of the day it’s people using a public space, how much effort do you want to go to in policing this stuff. We should be glad someone is getting use out of it.

Also reducing the number of fatties generates a public good that these trainers don’t capture the economic benefit of, so its a positive externality. Let’s say we don’t compensate them for that, and don’t tax them for the use of the commons, and call it even.

Disinformation 10:39 am 07 Dec 11

Shanski_0 said :

I’m “battling my weight. I battle to keep going when I attend battle camp…
I’m currently in a battle with my bulge… and battle camp is helping that…
I think the name of the company is perfect.

If you had only a weekly drop of battle rations, it would round out your weight battle nicely. Pack E was the nicest..

Holden Caulfield 10:29 am 07 Dec 11

watto23 said :

My thoughts are that boot camps/group training, should maybe need to register locations they will use with times etc and pay say a rego fee of say $100 a year. that way the public could find out when a public space is not being used for boot camps etc.

Understand and agree about your point on exclusivity of use when a sporting team rents an oval (or whatever).

I also think a modest blanket fee for Boot Camp operators to pay is a sensible approach. In line with the exclusivity of use, perhaps areas being used for Boot Camp activities could be cordoned off by the operators with some small lightweight witches hats (or similar), which could also help make other members of the public spaces that that particular space is temporarily off limits (should be obvious, I know, but the GP can fail basic logic at times).

watto23 10:12 am 07 Dec 11

I’m not a boot camp person, but I do have a personal trainer who operates a gym in her own home. I’ve also been involved in not-for profit sporting teams as well.

Generally junior clubs pay very little for ground hire (used to be $1 and hour). However the fees do stop bigger clubs from blanket booking everything (which happens to some extent anyway). But hiring the ground means you have exclusivity and you can politely ask for others to leave. Often if it was the public and not taking up much space, it didn’t bother us, but if a sporting club tried to sneak in some extra training, especially when we paid for the lighting (thats the expensive bit).

Also sporting clubs have specific needs and requirements. On occasion we would do a group run up a hill or through the streets etc and we didn’t have to pay for that. And sporting clubs, don’t make profits they do make money and want to keep growing etc and then pay staff wages etc so its still a business.

I’d also suggest from seeing a few boot camps around, that the people in them, are generally the ones that need motivation and exercise and are not necessarily the super fit crowd.

Also the reports from Sydney are basically councils trying to make more money. So whats the bigger evil here 🙂

My thoughts are that boot camps/group training, should maybe need to register locations they will use with times etc and pay say a rego fee of say $100 a year. that way the public could find out when a public space is not being used for boot camps etc.

Governments seem to be great at helping smokers and alcoholics, but not people who struggle to lose weight and eating less and exercising more is just part of the problem here.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site