Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Avani Terraces - Greenway
Life is looking up

Greenpeace busted for cleaning Canberra’s filthy streets?

By johnboy - 28 September 2009 16

[First filed: Sep 22, 2009 @ 14:22]

Greenpeace are claiming that two of their “dirtyk#vvers” were “apprehended” trying to clean their message onto Canberra’s dirty concrete near Parliament House as part of their Dirt Kev campaign.

Without wanting to re-visit the entire climate change debate, what are your thoughts on stencillers cleaning their message onto a surface rather than painting it?

Clean Graffiti?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

UPDATE: The ABC’s reporting on air that the charges have been thrown out, so hose away lads!

FURTHER UPDATE: And here’s the story.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
16 Responses to
Greenpeace busted for cleaning Canberra’s filthy streets?
Fisho 6:01 pm 28 Sep 09

I wonder if the greens would have come in to bat for them if their message was against climate change?

monomania 4:26 pm 28 Sep 09

If they were using tap water they could be fined for breaking water restrictions. $200 for an individual, $1000 for a corporation.

Deadmandrinking 3:10 pm 28 Sep 09

Damn straight there’s no evidence. Good on them, I encourage more of it!

Rawhide Kid No 2 2:50 pm 28 Sep 09

I would let them use my very muddy (dusty) car for their protests if they want.

busgirl 8:56 pm 21 Sep 09

Skidbladnir…are you one of those talking law books?

…cleaning their message on concrete?…why not try something a bit more creative like mowing their message in the grass at Bruce Stadium?

eh_steve 4:05 pm 21 Sep 09

Re-reading that last hastily banged out sentence, I should clarify that I mean I wouldn’t be surprised if pointing a gurney at them point blank WOULD be a factor in “degrading its function or contributing to accelerated deterioration.”

eh_steve 4:03 pm 21 Sep 09

It’s every bit as visible as graffiti done with paint, and it would likely be every bit as expensive to remove as graffiti done with paint. Why should their be any distinction betwen this and any other form of vandalism?

With those sandstone blocks Al, I wouldn’t be surprised if pointing a gurney at them point blank would not be a factor in “degrading its function or contributing to accelerated deterioration.”

Pommy bastard 2:26 pm 21 Sep 09

caf said :

This is just the political version of drawing “wash me” in the dust on someone’s Camry.

Agreed, it’s a shame the poll doesn’t offer the option to tick “Grow up FFS!”

Deadmandrinking 1:50 pm 21 Sep 09

Just stupid, goes to show the ridiculousness of our boys in blue in their eternal campaign to block free speech in this country.

Beau Locks 12:00 pm 21 Sep 09

Top work Greenpeace. I hope their new verb use sticks as well. (Sorry to the other Kevs out there.)

housebound 11:10 am 21 Sep 09

There’s no damage. Should the authorities arrest someone – eg God – every time it rains?

Maybe these protestors should have been arrested under water conservation laws.

WanniAss 11:05 am 21 Sep 09

Wouldn’t this mean that the guys who stencil numbers on driveways, usually the gutter bit, are committing an offence? Was Steve Pratt fined after the infamous grafitti clean up?

Maybe it was heritage listed dirt

Gungahlin Al 10:54 am 21 Sep 09

I love this idea. One viral video coming up…

And if the worst that comes from it is the government needs to turn around and actually clean the building, then great outcome all around.

Skid, I think the test on “interfering” would be as to degrading its function or contributing to accelerated deterioration. Hard to argue that cleaning would do either (even if it is only selective cleaning).

I think their only mistake was going too close to APH. I would have found out where various ALP people live/stay when in town and done all the footpaths around those areas. There’s plenty enough places need cleaning in Canberra…(People seem to think that just because something is raw concrete it means it never needs maintenance – bull.)

caf 10:47 am 21 Sep 09

This is just the political version of drawing “wash me” in the dust on someone’s Camry.

Skidbladnir 10:42 am 21 Sep 09

Depends.
Roads and Public Places Act 1937
Section 7: Damage to or interference with public places and property on them

Any person who—
(a) wilfully or negligently damages or suffers or causes damage to be done to; or
(b) without the written permission of the Minister or a roads and public places officer (proof of which lies on the person accused), interferes with;
any public place or any kerbstone, watertable, gutter, footpath or other work on it or any fence, post, lamp, lamp post, structure or other property of the Territory in any public place, commits an offence.
Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months or both.

Penalties:
The value of a penalty unit for an offence at the republication date is—
(a) if the person charged is an individual—$100; or
(b) if the person charged is a corporation—$500.

If the layer of accreted scum on a kerbstone is considered part of that kerbstone, or contributes to its material appearance, you’re damaging it (part a).
By cleaning it, you’d be interfering with it (part b).

So pay up, bitches.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site