Brisbane City Council has banned all photography and filming—including by smart glasses—at its public pools, effective immediately, as part of a trial of AI-monitoring technology. Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner said the measure, announced on 25 August 2026, is designed to ensure patrons can “feel safe and comfortable,” but the move has sparked debate over privacy and the growing use of surveillance in public spaces.
The ban, which covers all council-operated aquatic centres, prohibits the use of smartphones, cameras, and wearable devices capable of recording, such as smart glasses. The policy comes amid a trial of artificial intelligence systems that monitor pool areas for safety hazards and unusual behaviour, though the council has not specified how the AI works or whether it records footage.
Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner said the decision was driven by community feedback. “It’s everyone’s right … to feel safe and comfortable when they’re at our pools,” he said in a statement. “Modern wearable technology makes it possible for someone to film or photograph without others knowing, and we need to stay ahead of that.”
The ban does not apply to authorised council staff or lifeguards, who may use recording equipment for safety or training purposes. Patrons found violating the rule could be asked to leave or face further action, though the council has not detailed penalties.
The announcement follows similar moves by other Australian councils and international venues to restrict smart glasses, which have become more discreet and affordable. Brisbane’s trial of AI-monitoring technology—designed to detect drowning risks and crowd density—has raised questions about whether the ban is primarily about privacy or about normalising continuous surveillance.
Privacy advocates have expressed concern. “Banning photography is one thing, but pairing that with AI surveillance creates a double standard,” said Lucy Timmons, a digital rights researcher at the University of Queensland. “If the goal is comfort, people should know exactly what the AI sees and stores.”
The council has said the AI system does not store facial recognition data permanently, but it has not released a full privacy impact assessment. The trial is expected to run for six months before any decision on permanent implementation.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- Direct impact on pool-goers: Thousands of Brisbanites who use public pools now face a blanket ban on personal recording, affecting family photos, swimming lesson documentation, and casual use.
- Broader privacy precedent: Brisbane’s ban—coupled with AI surveillance—could set a template for other councils in Australia and overseas weighing how to regulate wearable cameras in sensitive spaces.
- Tech vs. trust tension: The policy highlights the growing friction between new consumer technology (smart glasses) and public expectations of privacy, with implications for how cities manage both safety and civil liberties.
Background
Brisbane City Council operates more than 20 public aquatic centres across the city, frequented by families, athletes, and school groups. Photography policies have traditionally been informal, with bans typically limited to change rooms. The rise of smart glasses—wearable devices with cameras that can record hands-free—has outpaced existing regulations.
In 2023, the Metropolitan Pool and Recreation Association in Victoria flagged concerns about smart glasses, and in 2024, a Sydney council banned them from gyms. Brisbane’s move is among the most comprehensive, applying to all recording devices across all pools and including an AI monitoring component.
The AI trial, which began earlier this year, uses camera feeds and computer vision to identify potential drownings and overcrowding. The council has said it improves response times, but critics argue the technology blurs the line between safety and surveillance.
Key Perspectives
[Brisbane City Council]: Argues the ban is “common sense” to protect patrons from covert recording. The AI trial is separate—focused only on safety, not enforcement—and does not record individuals permanently. The council says it will review the policy after the trial.
[Privacy Advocates and Digital Rights Groups]: Acknowledge the intent but warn that banning personal recording while expanding institutional surveillance creates a contradictory message. They call for transparent privacy impact assessments and independent oversight of the AI system.
[Tech Industry Representatives]: Some wearable tech makers have criticised the ban as reactionary, arguing that smart glasses have legitimate uses (e.g., accessibility aids for the visually impaired, fitness tracking). They say blanket bans stifle innovation.
What to Watch
- Release of the privacy impact assessment: The council has promised one but not delivered a date; its contents will be key to public trust.
- Enforcement incidents: First cases of patrons being asked to leave or penalised will test how strictly the ban is applied.
- Other councils’ responses: If Brisbane’s trial is seen as successful, similar bans may emerge across Queensland and beyond.
- Legal challenge potential: A court case could clarify whether bans on smart glasses—or AI monitoring without consent—breach surveillance legislation or anti-discrimination laws.