Social Engineering

[Tink]

Why should they pay for an event that was scheduled.

Victoria - the CRIME state.

What happened to Andrew Bolt walking to his meeting?

What happened to Margaret Court walking to her meeting?

--------------------------------------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/freedom-of-speech-and-protest.31657/page-6

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/i-dislike-daniel-andrews-intensely.32824/page-4

--------------------------------------------------

This was just before the Bourke St rampage -

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...s-or-a-sign-of-the-welfare-state.31012/page-5

 

[Tisme]

Media today saying Milo Y.'s management are refusing to pay the Victorian Government $50k for costs of policing outside the Melbourne meeting, saying "..sue us".

It was a legal meeting. Here's a thought Premier Bracks, what about the Leftist troublemakers paying the bill?

Right on.

 

[Value Collector]

Why should they pay for an event that was scheduled.

Victoria - the CRIME state.

What happened to Andrew Bolt walking to his meeting?

What happened to Margaret Court walking to her meeting?

--------------------------------------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/freedom-of-speech-and-protest.31657/page-6

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/i-dislike-daniel-andrews-intensely.32824/page-4

--------------------------------------------------

This was just before the Bourke St rampage -

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...s-or-a-sign-of-the-welfare-state.31012/page-5

Most events are charged by police to provide security.

eg, Concerts and festivals, the Sydney easter show etc all pay for a police presence.

From memory I think the easter show paid about $1.2 Million for the police presence there for the duration of the show.

They charge about $150 / hour per police officer

 

[wayneL]

so if you don't pay the taxpayrr funded coppers, the thugs are free to run amok.

there is something intrinsically wrong with that.

 

[SirRumpole]

so if you don't pay the taxpayrr funded coppers, the thugs are free to run amok.

there is something intrinsically wrong with that.

And if you do pay the coppers then the thieves and robbers take advantage of the fact that the copsa are at a concert or whatever.

Surely events should pay private security to do the work.

 

[Value Collector]

so if you don't pay the taxpayrr funded coppers, the thugs are free to run amok.

there is something intrinsically wrong with that.

I think it just comes down to if you request additional police presence at your Event, they charge you for that extra presence you are getting over and above what every one else is getting.

eg. If a bank requested to have a police officer stand at their door 9 - 5 every day, they would be charged.

You don't have to have extra police presence, you can just wait for a thug to come and commit a crime and then call the police just like anyone else, but if you want a large police presence to provide security as a deterrent then you have to pay for that.

Other wise, why would anyone pay private security or body guards, just request 10 cops to hang out at your business or event 24 hours a day waiting for something to happen.

 

[Value Collector]

Surely events should pay private security to do the work.

They can and do.

Police offer a different service, eg they can arrest and remove move people easier, and have almost unlimited back up if things go wrong.

 

[Value Collector]

I found this document that explains a bit about police charges and event planning etc.

Basically if you are operating an event, you can pay to have additional police rostered on to provide event security to your event.

These police are additional police that have been rostered on especially for the duration of your event, and will focus on only you event, eg they won't be called away for any general duties, they are part of a special "task group" assigned to your event only.

Commissioner’s Foreword

The New South Wales Police Force administers “user charges” policing services in accordance with Government policy.

There are times when police are required to provide public policing services that go beyond their general responsibilities to the community and which help our clients meet both their business needs and their responsibilities to the community.

Recovering this cost from clients ensures that normal policing services to the community can be maintained.

I encourage all of our clients to consider how their activities may impact on public safety and to cooperate fully with police so that their particular interests and the interests of the wider community can both be addressed.

Mr Andrew SCIPIONE Commissioner, NSW Police Force

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/9066/Policy_-_User_Charges_-_Final.pdf

 

[SirRumpole]

I found this document that explains a bit about police charges and event planning etc.

Basically if you are operating an event, you can pay to have additional police rostered on to provide event security to your event.

These police are additional police that have been rostered on especially for the duration of your event, and will focus on only you event, eg they won't be called away for any general duties, they are part of a special "task group" assigned to your event only.


http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/9066/Policy_-_User_Charges_-_Final.pdf

I didn't read it all, but I gather that the "paid for" police would be those who would be otherwise off duty and would be getting overtime for event control ? If so, that's fair enough if they are not taken away from normal duties.

 

[Value Collector]

I didn't read it all, but I gather that the "paid for" police would be those who would be otherwise off duty and would be getting overtime for event control ? If so, that's fair enough if they are not taken away from normal duties.

Also, whether you charge for an event makes a difference. If the organisers or sponsors are making a commercial gain, then the tax payer is not expected to provide additional security free of charge.

If it's a free event or for charity, the police provide the additional security for free.

A 100% exemption for user charges applies where an event meets both the organisation and event criteria.

Organisation Criteria

• The body organising the event is authorised to collect donations under the Charitable Collections Act 1991 or it is an incorporated non profit community organisation: and
  
  
• Has insufficient reserves or resources to meet the costs. Event Criteria
  
  • The event is free of charge to spectators; and
    
    
  • The event is conducted solely for the benefit of a charitable or community organisation and
    
    not conducted in whole or in part for the commercial gain of the organiser or commercial sponsor.

 

[wayneL]

I guess the question is whether the additional police were requested

 

[wayneL]

Fb part from Lib Dems:

The following email to the Victorian Police Minister Lisa Neville was sent by party member AJ Frost. He poses a reasonable set of questions to the Minister. In terms of protecting people’s fundamental rights are the police being a part of the solution or a part of the problem?

EMAIL:-

"I have been following the events around Milo Yiannopoulos and his tour around Australia.

One point that stood out to me was the intent of Victoria Police to invoice his promoters for the costs of the police presence at the protests outside his event.

While on one hand I can understand the argument for financing police services on something approximating a user-pays basis, it concerns me that too much discretion in such matters could function as a powerful tool for shutting down events, particularly events concerning political speech, that the state government of the time happens to disagree with.

Are there any official, publicly viewable guidelines for when an event will incur such a fee? If so, could you please direct me to or provide a copy of these guidelines?

Further, it seems clear that the protesters involved in this case, namely antifa and associated far-left groups, protest political events like Mr Yiannopoulos' speech with the intent of shutting them down through sheer inconvenience, financial or otherwise.

Has it been considered what impact the invoicing decision will have, in terms of creating future incentives for these groups to protest more frequently, in greater numbers, and with behavior that will maximize police expense, knowing that their political enemies will bear the cost? Is there any reason that, given the decision to finance the police presence directly rather than through general revenue, no attempt seems to have been made to bill the organizers of the protests themselves?"

 

[Value Collector]

I guess the question is whether the additional police were requested

In that link I provided, it also says the police can deploy to your event if they feel they need to for public safety reasons and pass any cost on to you.

Eg, if your private security arrangements are not good enough and aren't handling a situation.

 

[Value Collector]

Fb part from Lib Dems:

The following email to the Victorian Police Minister Lisa Neville was sent by party member AJ Frost. He poses a reasonable set of questions to the Minister. In terms of protecting people’s fundamental rights are the police being a part of the solution or a part of the problem?

EMAIL:-

"I have been following the events around Milo Yiannopoulos and his tour around Australia.

One point that stood out to me was the intent of Victoria Police to invoice his promoters for the costs of the police presence at the protests outside his event.

While on one hand I can understand the argument for financing police services on something approximating a user-pays basis, it concerns me that too much discretion in such matters could function as a powerful tool for shutting down events, particularly events concerning political speech, that the state government of the time happens to disagree with.

Are there any official, publicly viewable guidelines for when an event will incur such a fee? If so, could you please direct me to or provide a copy of these guidelines?

Further, it seems clear that the protesters involved in this case, namely antifa and associated far-left groups, protest political events like Mr Yiannopoulos' speech with the intent of shutting them down through sheer inconvenience, financial or otherwise.

Has it been considered what impact the invoicing decision will have, in terms of creating future incentives for these groups to protest more frequently, in greater numbers, and with behavior that will maximize police expense, knowing that their political enemies will bear the cost? Is there any reason that, given the decision to finance the police presence directly rather than through general revenue, no attempt seems to have been made to bill the organizers of the protests themselves?"

If I a promoter hires Beyoncé, and books out concerts in cities across Australia, the police will want to be present to ensure public safety.

These costs will be passed along to Beyonce and her promoters.

How is Milo different?

 

[luutzu]

If I a promoter hires Beyoncé, and books out concerts in cities across Australia, the police will want to be present to ensure public safety.

These costs will be passed along to Beyonce and her promoters.

How is Milo different?

If it's a commercial event requiring extra policing, charging them is fair enough. Just from personal experiences, the police force now charges (extra) for everything.

My mum was involved in a car accident, no one was injured with the other driver being at fault. The guy don't want to admit he was at fault and so the cop was called.

They told us over the phone that we better resolved it ourselves because if they come out they'll have to fine someone. Sure enough they did fine the other guy.

On another occasion my then gf was in an accident. She was at fault and no one's denying that. But it was an accident. It wasn't reckless driving but still she got fined. Then also charged for the fire and ambulance services.

That seem to go a bit far isn't it? I mean taxpayers already pay for the police services... when an accident happen, isn't it part of their job to respond? Public safety and such... why the extra charge?

And apparently, if your house gets broken into and no one was home but your stuff get stolen, call the insurance because cops don't chase property theft anymore.

 

[Logique]

Who pays the bill for extra police at union demonstrations?

There's plenty of politics in this, in the People's Republic of Victoria.

 

[moXJO]

If it's a commercial event requiring extra policing, charging them is fair enough. Just from personal experiences, the police force now charges (extra) for everything.

My mum was involved in a car accident, no one was injured with the other driver being at fault. The guy don't want to admit he was at fault and so the cop was called.

They told us over the phone that we better resolved it ourselves because if they come out they'll have to fine someone. Sure enough they did fine the other guy.

On another occasion my then gf was in an accident. She was at fault and no one's denying that. But it was an accident. It wasn't reckless driving but still she got fined. Then also charged for the fire and ambulance services.

That seem to go a bit far isn't it? I mean taxpayers already pay for the police services... when an accident happen, isn't it part of their job to respond? Public safety and such... why the extra charge?

And apparently, if your house gets broken into and no one was home but your stuff get stolen, call the insurance because cops don't chase property theft anymore.

Yeah they don't bother with a lot of crimes now. I had $20000 worth of tools stolen and one of my work vehicles knocked off this year.
Cops found the van parked on a football field after someone called it in. I saw some cctv cameras next door that had filmed the thieves pulling up in another car. Cops didn't even bother checking it out.
The only way they find stuff is if someone gives them a tipoff.

 

[Value Collector]

They told us over the phone that we better resolved it ourselves because if they come out they'll have to fine someone. Sure enough they did fine the other guy.

Had he broken a Law or road rule?

If so I think its completely fair to fine the person, a fine is a perfectly acceptable punishment, better than jail.

On another occasion my then gf was in an accident. She was at fault and no one's denying that. But it was an accident. It wasn't reckless driving but still she got fined. Then also charged for the fire and ambulance services.

What was the situation? I don't really believe you can say "she was at fault" but then say "its an accident".

I think if something is your fault, you should pay to fix it, so its fair for her to be charged the fire and ambulance, maybe pay a fine.

That seem to go a bit far isn't it? I mean taxpayers already pay for the police services... when an accident happen, isn't it part of their job to respond? Public safety and such... why the extra charge?

It is their job to respond, but if you caused a scene that was your fault, isn't it also fair that you cover some of the cost?

 

[luutzu]

Yeah they don't bother with a lot of crimes now. I had $20000 worth of tools stolen and one of my work vehicles knocked off this year.
Cops found the van parked on a football field after someone called it in. I saw some cctv cameras next door that had filmed the thieves pulling up in another car. Cops didn't even bother checking it out.
The only way they find stuff is if someone gives them a tipoff.

yea, it's getting ridiculous.

We had our car stolen a few years back. Someone eventually called in and the cops picked it up, towed it to their forensic lab somewhere because it was stolen during a break in with us inside the house.

So after they're done with checking the car for prints, they called us and said we have to pay them for the tow and the storage.

I mean, the car costs maybe $2,000 if we sell it. Yet the tow and storage at their warehouse goes for some $500. And it was stolen.

 

[luutzu]

Had he broken a Law or road rule?

If so I think its completely fair to fine the person, a fine is a perfectly acceptable punishment, better than jail.

What was the situation? I don't really believe you can say "she was at fault" but then say "its an accident".

I think if something is your fault, you should pay to fix it, so its fair for her to be charged the fire and ambulance, maybe pay a fine.

It is their job to respond, but if you caused a scene that was your fault, isn't it also fair that you cover some of the cost?

She was at a traffic light turning right. She misjudged the oncoming car's distance and it bummed into her car.

So technically it was her fault. But she wasn't under the influence or reckless... it was an accident, right?

I mean we can always say that any accident was due to recklessness, but there are certain degree. Maybe intend to harm or reckless speeding. I don't think the police are permitted that kind of judgment. All they do is if they turn up, someone will get fined to cover the cost.

Maybe one day we'd get fine for infringement and a second fine for bothering the officer to have to fine us.

It's easy to say it's fair to fine people... but man, most average people are on a very tight budget. Sometime a few hundred dollars could send them broke.

So with my gf's then fines. Her car was totalled. It was a relief that no one was injured... but she was at uni, pay $250 or more for the "reckless driving", about the same amount each for the ambulance and the fire service. And this was back when her part-time job earn about $250 a week.