Randwick City Council wants to privatise and limit your beach going experience.
In what is expected to be a first for Sydney, up to 10 per cent of the Clovelly Bay promenade could be reserved, with plans to introduce the service on other beaches, including Coogee and Maroubra, if it is successful.
You know, increasingly we see small encroachments like this onto what were once our public commons. The impetus? Mayor Ted Seng tells.
“We keep on getting proposals from business people and we thought it was time we tried this particular service,” he said.
I don’t really know where to start on this one, but it’s clear that there was no demand by the public for this “service” to begin with, the demand is only being driven by folks who would like to make us pay for something that our taxes already contribute to, a public beach space to throw down our towel where we’d like to, just like we always have. I willing to bet that if this idea catches on, we’ll soon see the best parts of a beach privatized in this way and locked down to other beach goers.
Why is Randwick Council acting on behalf of such a silly and annoying business idea instead of preserving what little public and community space is left in Sydney for all of us? It’s the beach dammit, a place where we’re equal in our budgie smuggling, thong wearing semi-nakedness, an icon of Australian egalitarianism. But maybe that’s the problem all along, no one sees any value in egalitarianism or public space anymore, it’s obviously time to get rid of it.
Sheesh!
And you can’t even have a smoke on the beaches anymore.
And, C.L., if you’re reading, you can’t on the grass at St Stephen’s either!
Whatever happened to public space indeed?
And semi-nakedness is as good as it gets on Australian beaches. Whereas… in Sweden…
Urgh! That’s so stupid! I hope the people of Randwick get in their council’s face about this!
Agreed!
Seriously, any incursion on the commons is to be deplored.
Sorry but banning smoking on the beach is a Good Thing. Smoking wouldn’t be such a Bad Thing at the beach if smokers actually took their butts away with them. But if it was up to me smoking would be banned everywhere. Conspicuous consumption of Pinot Noir would be compulsory.
This proposal, OTOH, absolutely sucks.
I don’t know where to start on this one. Gobsmacked.
I’d like to stuff an idiot Mayor, with sea stingers inserted with sharkskin gloves. Goofing around without money or responsibility where the land meets the sand is what made so much of this place what we like.
Should be a law against it!
Clovelly’s one of my fave beaches but it has been becoming more commercialised and cleaned up in recent years and they put a huge pile of concrete all over it last summer in a piece of environmental vandalism … it looks like it’s all downhill from here.
Yes, a shocker - a direct attack on the meaning of Australia. And I suspect the Bra Boys will make short work of any extensions of this idea to my old home beach.
You’re a Maroubra boy, Chris? So am I since ‘48 although I am now living in the Blue Mountains. Swam at Clovelly EVERY day except Christmas Day for 30 odd years with one of the best men I’ve ever known - swim coach Tom Caddy.
As an ex Coogee resident I find this idea appalling. Coogee is still my favourite beach (and coming from a Far North Coast girl this is high praise) and to think part of it would be shut off so someone can make a quick buck is nothing less than disgusting. I think a bikini protest is in order, stretch marks and all.
I”m with Andrew on this — the only thing worse than finding a cigarette butt on the beach is finding a dog turd (or, for that matter, a needle).
Yep Ron, I was a local at the Bra for 12 years. Used to love that north end in Winter.
This ties in with a similar problem in the eastern suburbs , where commercial fitness camps mark out parts of beaches and parks and then claiming exclusive use of those areas. In some cases they have been aggressive about preventing local residents from using those areas.
Interestingly, Waverley and Randwick Councils have started clamping down on this.
I dunno. It’s quite common in Europe. And there’s plenty of sand girting Australia. I think a two-tier system is actually quite egalitarian. Those who can afford to pay for extra services and less noise and general unkemptness will be subsidising the rest. Win, win.
It will also enable film companies and the like to negotiate sensible arrangements with private interests rather than having to deal with councils and the attendant democratic morass.
And on members only beaches, smoking could be allowed. In contrast to the nanny state public beaches (ugh!). Where apparently it’s just fine to leave a nappy lying around but a bloke can’t enjoy a fine panatella as the sun sets bloody red in the sea. As he regards from not too afar the pleasures of lost youth.
As I had my yearly argument with the Baboon last week, I’ll leave it to others to explain why establishing a class structure on Australian beaches is not exactly egalitarian, with or without trickle down economics.
wbb - Why exactly should film companies and the like be allowed to “negotiate sensible arrangements with private interests” over the use of public land? It’s our land, why should we have to just hand it over to the business community so that they can make a few extra dollars?
It’s true that they do this all over Europe, and it’s largely hated by most people. Most Europeans I have met love being able to come to Australia and not have to pay for the “priviledge” of going to the beach. They think it says a lot about the good nature of Australian people. Why take that away for a few extra quid?
Clearly the peasants don’t pay enough eh Babs? I guess leather bound deckchairs are in order.
mick - it’s hated in Old Europe, however in the recently freed democracies of New Europe, it will be adopted enthusiastically. And private beaches are not new in Australia. Lindsay Fox has free-holded a nice patch of sand down Portsea way. There were no objections.
The environmental benefits are also not to be sneezed at. Presently the well-heeled are forced to fly to Port Douglas etc in order to gain access to well kept beaches. If the landlocked burghers of Toorak were allowed the use of one or two of the nicer beaches within motoring distance, then the ozone layer would be the winner.
This is simply a question of whether the people are willing to share with the rich. I believe they are. Of course those on the left take a more insulting view of the working class and believe they will fight tooth and nail for exclusive control of every last beach in the country.
Public beaches are all well and good, until you see the amount of pollution, debris, and litter left by people who apparently don’t give a damn about the ecosystems and environment they’re hurting. There’s not a way to just set up “security surveillance cameras” to see people who are doing it, and to fine them…it’s a public beach, remember? Who wants to be watched while you’re supposed to be “getting away” from constant scrutiny? If there were a way to set up recycling/trash cans, and have people or organizations “adopt” an area to clean, and to fine those found littering (if the government could pay for a security guard nearby with the tax money we’re already contributing), then I think that would be a solution….rather than turning it over to privatised corporations who may lay down concrete, commercial advertisement, or charge money to visit.