purplecthulhu

Ah-ha! Caught you out! I blogged this _days_ ago ... you've been ignoring me :-)))

My initial response was "this smells of bullshit". I started looking online, and mostly found references to this petitions on various web forums, mostly along the following lines:

- Someone posts about the petition.
- Lots of people say 'how awful!' and pledge to sign.
- Someone else says 'what exactly are these proposed restrictions?'
- There is a confused discussion which ends up admitting that there don't seem to be any.

However, I then hit on a more-informed than most discussion (see the lengthy comment by 'Steve W' in particular) which led me to the web page run by the petition organiser, Simon Taylor.

What seems to have been happening is an increasing frequency of two sorts of incidents. Photographers are being stopped, and in some cases threatened with legal action, for photographing children. Alternatively, they are being asked to move on under pressure from professional photographers seeking to protect their income. (In one example cited, both factors seem to be at work.) One of the links from Mr Taylor's page points to a discussion of a ban proposed by Vale of Glamorgan Council to restrict photography in public parks 'to protect children'; however it seems that the Council have now rejected this proposal - perhaps they got legal advice!

So, it seems that in fact there is no proposed national legislation to restrict photography; rather, there is a trend towards local government bodies either proposing local legislation or encouraging/allowing staff (such as Child Protection Officers) to enforce such a policy. I think what Mr Taylor means by his petition is really to ask HMG to act centrally to stop such formal or informal bans coming into place.

The point here is I'm not sure what No 10 could do, other than perhaps put out a statement once the petition closes to say that HMG does not support such bans. The obvious measure of passing a law saying 'you can take photos in public' would not sit well with English common law, which has long taken the position that the law should only take away rights, not specifically create them, because we assume that rights are inherent, not handed down by government, and that it is a Bad Thing to act otherwise. (This was actually the basis that some Tories objected to the Human Rights Act. I think they were wrong, but it was at least a legally valid point.)

For my part - speaking as a trainee lawyer! - I think the best route to tackling this would be to seek judicial review of any local council that does have such restrictions, or even a policy that amounts to the same, on the basis that it breaches Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression). Whilst Art 10(2) does allow exceptions for the protection of society or individuals, they must be proportionate, and I think it would be very hard to defend broad restrictions on photography on this basis.

So, to summarise:

There do not seem to be plans to legislate against photography, but some local councils seem to have formal or informal policies against it, and this is what needs to be nipped in the bud.

This really _is_ madness... And I realise that I have so far signed every petition that you have put up on LJ. Either you have enormous power over me, or your views are extremely close to mine!

However, the Mayor of London (our Ken) has spoken out in favour of banning photography in public places. The situation in Somerset House, for instance, is that while there is no offical ban, anyone using a camera while children are using the fountain court (i.e. spring/summer/autumn) might be in trouble...