Council introduces $140 trailer fines

Lydia Kellner, Journalist

Updated 28 Oct 2026, 4:32am

First published 28 Oct 2026, 4:30am

Sutherland Shire’s long-awaited trailer parking crackdown will finally begin in late November, with owners facing $140 fines for leaving unhitched trailers on streets in five trial zones.

The controversial six-month trial was originally due to start in late July, but has been delayed by about four months as the council finalises signage, operations and community notifications.

Sutherland Shire Council says the restrictions are being introduced after a flood of complaints from frustrated residents about boat trailers, caravans and other trailers taking up street parking and creating safety concerns.

A council spokesperson confirmed to Shire News that the rollout was now close.

MORE NEWS

‘Loser’: Owner’s illegal act in neighbour fight

Where single Aussies can move for under $4000

‘Surprised’: Snake emerges from family’s toilet

“Sutherland Shire Council is finalising operational arrangements and community communications for the rollout of its six-month Trailer Parking Restriction Trial across the five designated locations,” the spokesperson said.

“Parking restriction signage is expected to be installed from late October to early November, with the trial anticipated to commence in late November 2026.”

Tonkin Street precinct in Cronulla is among five key trial areas. Image: Google Maps

---

Once in force, the restrictions will ban unhitched trailers from parking in signed areas under “No Parking Motor Vehicles Excepted” rules. 

That includes boat trailers, caravans, box trailers and horse floats.

The five locations selected for the trial are the Tonkin Street precinct in Cronulla, the Gannons Road and Woolooware Golf Course precinct, the Woolooware Road and Kingsway sports fields precinct in Woolooware, the Lilli Pilli Sports Ground precinct and Tivoli Esplanade in Como.

The trial will commence in November. Source: Google Maps

---

Council says drivers will get a three-week warning period before fines start being issued.

The move follows more than 2400 reports about boat trailer parking and more than 500 complaints about caravans received by council during 2025.

More from News

17 Sydney and NSW suburbs defy downturn with $100k price jumps in three months

11 hours ago

It says the trial will be used to assess whether the changes improve parking availability, road safety and local amenity, with the results helping determine whether similar restrictions should be made permanent or expanded to other parts of the shire.

The proposed fines have triggered a fierce reaction online, with many locals backing the tougher approach.

Fines of $140 could be handed out.

---

“If you can’t store your belongings on your property, it can’t be on the street. Simple,” one person wrote on Facebook.

“If you need to park it on the street you can’t afford a boat,” another said.

A third added: “Bring the restrictions in other areas as well. We have difficulty seeing clearance due to a boat parking on the kerb.”

Others, however, questioned whether owners of registered trailers should be penalised.

“Cash grab. If it’s registered it’s legal to park there,” one person argued.

Another wrote: “$140 fine? Cheaper than renting a parking space.”

A third said: “If it’s registered it’s legal. See you in court.”

Don’t Pursue Happiness. It Will Make You Terribly Unhappy.

 

Don’t Pursue Happiness. It Will Make You Terribly Unhappy.

Following up on my previous post, The Meaning of Your Life: Finding Purpose in an Age of Emptiness: The Free Press: Don’t Pursue Happiness. It Will Make You Terribly Unhappy., by Arthur Brooks (Vanderbilt) (Author, The Meaning of Your Life: Finding Purpose in an Age of Emptiness (2026)):

As someone who has dedicated my life to studying happiness, I am often asked two related questions: What is happiness? And how do we pursue it? During this semiquincentennial anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, those questions have taken on new urgency. Two hundred and fifty years ago, after all, Thomas Jefferson famously declared that we have the God-given right to “the pursuit of happiness.”

What did he mean? And what does this mean for us in 2026?

This column is named for the Declaration’s founding promise, so you’d hope that I would know something about exactly how to pursue happiness. The problem is that when this tricky phrase is followed as we often understand happiness today—a physical sensation to be obtained—it leads in the wrong direction. The more you pursue feelings of happiness, the less of it you will get. …

[L]ive an honorable and upright life, do your duty, and happiness will pursue you. … For Jefferson, happiness was a way of living; feelings be damned. Today—for most people, at least—it is your feelings. …

People really are happier when they help others. … Researchers have even found physical evidence that other-serving behavior literally feelsgood. Specifically, altruistic activity engages the brain’s reward systems. …

Even more effective than giving money is acting generously. As Rabbi Yitzhak taught in the Babylonian Talmud some 1,500 years ago, “Anyone who gives a peruta [a small coin] to a poor person receives six blessings, and whoever consoles him with words of comfort and encouragement receives 11 blessings.” And the fact that this is a religious claim is no coincidence: Serving others as the secret to happiness has been taught by every serious religion throughout history. This is no doubt one reason that religious people who take their faith seriously are, on average, happier than others. They are following a moral aspiration that may seem harder than the animal impulse to selfishness, but that effort is rewarded with well-being.

Read more

The Lucrative World of Literary Scams.

  

Online Privacy for Parents and Youth

EFF – Surveillance/Self Defense Guide: “Deciding how to help youth use the internet—including engaging with video games, social media, web search, and everything else—is a complicated topic that touches on many different skillsets and ideas. But ultimately, it is up to families to decide when and how to engage with these sorts of questions.  

Each young person has unique needs, and, just like their wardrobe, that changes as they age. What’s right for one person may not be for another. Trying to protect your family from everything all the time is impractical and exhausting, but some thoughtful planning can help you find the best, most efficient solutions.  

Solutions are not necessarily about just the tools or software you use. It’s about understanding the threats and concerns you have, and then determining what steps you can take to mitigate those risks. In security, we call this process security planning (or threat modeling), and it’s as applicable in deciding how to manage the privacy and security of youth as it is for adults…”

THE 21st CENTURY IS NOT TURNING OUT AS I HAD HOPED: The Lucrative World of Literary Scams.

“Hello Professor Snigdha Poonam,” the email began. I read that again. Nobody has ever called me “professor” for the obvious reason that I am not a professor. Bracing myself, I read on.

The email was from Timothy Firth, organizer of a Seattle-based life-drawing community with 1,943 members that regularly has “thoughtful discussions inspired by creative works.” A recent inspiration was my first book, Dreamers: How Young Indians Are Changing Their World. The group wanted to discuss it, the email said, at one of its upcoming meetups. Attendees would be encouraged to post reviews on Goodreads and Amazon after.

I looked up CAM Life Drawing and found an events page and an Instagram account. The latter had some photos of Timothy Firth — white, male — as well as testimonials from members who said he worked “day and night to create more community space.” Something told me this wasn’t the man who had reached out to me.

Why would a hyperlocal life-drawing community in Seattle be interested in a nonfiction book about the shifting aspirations of young people in India’s small towns?  The book was published seven years ago. What did they want from me?

I accepted the invitation. The next email had a slick poster promoting the Zoom event, with the book cover as the backdrop and blurbs from the Economistand other publications. My attention was drawn to something more intriguing: a request for a “contribution fee,” with no amount specified. It would cover promotion, coordination and administration. But, oddly, this email didn’t come from Timothy. Signing off this time was Stephen — “Organizer, Community Improv LA,” another group in another city. According to the improv community’s Facebook group, Stephen is indeed the name of the organizer. However, Stephen had written to me using Timothy’s email address. To add to the chaos, Stephen/Timothy had also left what I suspect was an AI prompt in the email, which included the line: “MAKE IT MORE PROFESSIONAL.”

This was undoubtedly a scam. Genuine book clubs don’t ask for money from authors. But who was behind it?

Pocock reveals former TPB CEO complaints to Senate

Pocock reveals former TPB CEO complaints to Senate

Greens Senator Barbara Pocock raises allegations of misconduct, bullying and interference in investigations into PwC Australia by tax regulators

TOM RAVLIC

Tom Ravlic OCT 30, 2026

The Australian Greens have revealed that the former secretary of the Tax Practitioners Board lodged a formal complaint against staff of the TPB and the Australian Taxation Office about conduct related to investigations into PwC Australia.

Greens Senator Barbara Pocock referred to the complaints made by former TPB secretary Michael O’Neill during two sets of hearings in Senate estimates.

Pocock first attempted to table the document unredacted when the Australian Public Service Commission but that was unsuccessful because the document was deemed to contain information that was sensitive and ought to be protected.

The Greens senator took a second opportunity to raise O’Neill’s complaints during the appearance at Senate estimates by the Australian Taxation Office and the TPB.

Pocock began her line of questioning of the two tax-related agencies by providing both Rob Heferen, the ATO commissioner, and Peter de Cure, the TPB chair, with a copy of the document for their information.

Heferen originally received a copy as the first port of call for an employee complaint while de Cure only learned of the document’s existence when Pocock attempted to have it tabled and published the day before.

“Mr O’Neill makes five allegations in his, uh, complaint. The first of them relates to the actions of some APS officers and officials and raises significant concerns about the adherence of those officers to the APS code of conduct,” Pocock said.

“And then there are four other issues, the independence of the TPB and its operation in relation to the PwC matter (https://www.themandarin.com.au/305510-tax-heavyhitter-orme-takes-up-top-tpb-role/), the TPB’s investigations in relation to PwC and Peter John Collins.

“Thirdly, evidence provided at parliamentary hearings and responses to questions on notice. And fourthly, ongoing bullying, harassment, and threats against him, uh, as he exercised his powers as the TPB’s CEO and secretary.”

Heferen told the committee that he was dutybound to not discuss or reveal anything associated with the complaint because both the document and the outcome of the actual investigation were protected information under the privacy and public service laws.

“In particular, such disclosure may send a message to the public and the whole common public sector that conducts processes can be made public and this could undermine the effectiveness of the hundreds of investigations that occur every year that potentially jeopardise workplace integrity conditions and performance,” Heferen said.

“I mean, given that advice, guidance to me, I’m afraid, senator, I feel, I am concerned if I step into a discussion of any of the matters, given that I’ve been given an explicit instruction not to publicly disclose, that I could then be operating in breach of the code,  in that I’m failing to protect confidential information.”

Pocock then attempted to raise a matter with Heferen related to allegations of bullying, threats and harassment.

Heferen returned served by telling Pocock that he was unable to talk about any matters involved in the complaint, and that de Cure having a copy of the document before him might actually be in breach of the requirements for documents to be kept private and confidential.

Pocock decided to try another vein of inquiry, but this time she directed it at the de Cure in his capacity as TPB chairman.

She pointed to a portion of the complaint in which O’Neill alleged that a question on notice may not have been dealt with in accordance with Pocock’s instruction.

The complaint as described by Pocock is that O’Neill was asked to respond to certain questions about changes to rules related to the appointment of the CEO and secretary of the TPB.

Pocock’s line of questioning implies that the response to the question on notice that was asked in February 2024 did not come from O’Neill personally, and that is what she wanted: the perspective of somebody in the middle of an investigation into PwC Australia that was experiencing various workplace pressures.

“Do you accept that you have misled the Senate in not complying with my request to have Mr O’Neill’s version of events, which he did prepare? You have agreed to supply them to the Senate,” Pocock said.

“They weren’t supplied to the parliament. Do you agree you have misled us in not responding to a very clear request?”

De Cure said he wanted to consult the TPB’s records related to drafting the response to Pocock’s initial notice question.

Pocock will have to wait to see what the TPB manages to find in its records in response to her request for all relevant materials related to that February 2024 question.

Context:

Key Allegations in the Complaint

APS Code of Conduct: Concerns regarding the actions, behavior, and code of conduct adherence of Australian Public Service (APS) officers and officials. 
TPB Independence: Questions over the operational independence of the TPB during the handling of the PwC matter and former partner Peter John Collins. 
PwC and Collins Investigations: Specific conduct and decisions tied to the TPB's regulatory probes into PwC Australia. 
Parliamentary Testimony: Issues surrounding evidence provided at parliamentary hearings and formal responses to questions on notice. 
Handling of Questions on Notice: Allegations that a February 2024 question on notice response regarding rules for appointing the TPB CEO and secretary did not properly reflect O'Neill's direct perspective or instructions. 

The document was handed directly to ATO Commissioner Rob Heferen and TPB Chair Peter de Cure during the hearings. Further details and ongoing parliamentary scrutiny can be followed via The Mandarin or updates from the Australian Greens. 

Greens Senator Barbara Pocock raised a formal complaint made by former Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) secretary Michael O’Neill during Senate estimates hearings involving the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the TPB.

Tabling Attempts: Pocock first attempted to table the document unredacted through the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC), which was blocked because the material was deemed sensitive and protected. She later raised the contents directly during Senate estimates sessions with ATO Commissioner Rob Heferen and TPB Chair Peter de Cure.
Agency Response: Heferen declined to discuss the contents or outcome of the complaint, noting he was bound by privacy and public service laws protecting the document.

PWC scandal

Former PwC partner banned for integrity breach 

Barbara Pocock 29 Oct 2026

Estimates - Barb still fighting the good fight 1.23.30; 2.10; 2.38; 2.44.55