What was resolved

The notice of motion was moved by Cr Ryan Brooke and seconded by Cr Marc Sutherland, and carried 8-0 as resolution 273/26. Cr Steve Mears was on leave. The resolution asks for a report that should:

  • investigate the practicality and enforceability of prohibiting the use of smart glasses and other covert recording technologies in Council facilities, naming swimming pools, sporting field change rooms and playgrounds;
  • identify the legal, privacy, child safety and operational issues, and whether such restrictions already exist in some form relating to mobile phone recording devices;
  • identify unintended consequences, particularly for people with vision impairment or disability who may use smart glasses to assist them with their daily activities; and
  • recommend any measures the council should take.

The resolution gives no date for the report. The motion's supporting notes list policy and legal implications as nil at this stage, financial implications as nil, and community consultation as nil at this stage.

The case the motion makes

Cr Brooke's supporting information says residents have contacted the councillor wanting similar action here, and that the difference from a phone is visibility: smart glasses are designed to be worn discreetly and resemble ordinary eyewear, meaning that a person being filmed, and those around them, are unlikely to be aware that recording is taking place. It argues that pools, change rooms, public toilets and playgrounds are places where people expect privacy and children are often present, and that hard-to-spot recording places a greater onus on Council to ensure that staff are equipped to recognise these devices and respond appropriately to complaints.

The motion's preamble, as carried, also says the Attorney-General (the motion does not say which) has encouraged councils in the media to act, and lists councils that have moved already: Yarra, Inner West, Canterbury-Bankstown and the City of Sydney, which it says have banned smart glasses from their facilities, and Brisbane, which it says has banned the non-consensual use of camera-enabled devices at its 21 public pools. It describes Gold Coast as considering a similar model and Wollongong as reviewing its policies. Those are the motion's statements; we have not checked each council's decision against its own records.

The same notes are explicit about the other side. Smart glasses can be groundbreaking accessibility tools for people living with disabilities, such as those who are vision-impaired or experiencing hearing loss, and any restriction needs to take into account residents who rely on this technology to assist them with daily activities.

Our view

This is a well-built motion: it asks for evidence before a rule, and it writes the accessibility question into the brief rather than leaving it for a complaint after the fact. The part of the report that will decide most is item (b), whether restrictions on recording with a phone already exist in some form. If council pools and change rooms already forbid filming people, a separate glasses rule may add little to what is permitted. Its real work would be in what the motion itself identifies: noticing a device that looks like ordinary eyewear, and staff who know what to do when someone complains. A sign at the door is the cheap part. The report will be worth reading for whether it says how a ban would be enforced at a busy pool on a summer afternoon, and how a person who needs the glasses would be let in without having to explain their disability at the counter.

We will cover the staff report if it reaches a council meeting.

Sources

Method. Researched and drafted with AI, straight from the primary sources below. Software matched 7 quotations exactly against our stored copies of their sources. How The Current works.

  1. Tamworth Regional Council, Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting, 13 October 2026 (PDF, read 18 October 2026; page numbers are the minutes' own, of 30): attendance and Cr Mears's leave (page 4), item 5.1 notice of motion as carried, the vote and resolution 273/26 (pages 6 and 7).
  2. Tamworth Regional Council, Business Paper, Ordinary Council Meeting, 13 October 2026 (PDF, read 18 October 2026): item 5.1, Cr Brooke's notice of motion of 2 October 2026 with its supporting information and implications (pages 7 to 9).

How we did this

We downloaded the business paper and the minutes for Tamworth Regional Council's 13 October 2026 ordinary meeting from the council's business papers page and read item 5.1 in both. The list of other councils and the Attorney-General's encouragement (the motion does not say which Attorney-General) are as the motion states them; we have not checked them against those councils' or the Attorney-General's own records. We did not contact the council or any councillor for this piece. The “our view” section is opinion based on the documents described.