#Winning – Labour takes down signs

Despite their leader saying this morning that the signs would be staying, Labour is now busily removing the signs. NZPA reportson Labour’s sign U-Turn:

Labour does a U-Turn on SignsA number of Labour Party campaign signs have been removed from a Hutt Valley street after being found to be in breach of road requirements.

The signs, which emulate road stop signs in shape and colour, but contain the message “Stop asset sales vote Labour”, had been erected along the median strip of a road in Petone….

…The Hutt City Council, which is the road controlling authority for the area, said this afternoon that the signs had been taken down.

“The signs did not meet any road signage requirements and following a complaint from the public they were removed,” the council said in a statement.

General secretary of the Labour Party Chris Flatt said the party had not been formally told of any rules the signs had breached.

“We were told they were taken down within an hour,” Mr Flatt told NZPA.

“Any reasonable person would see that the nature of the writing and the ‘vote Labour’ on there indicates they’re not traffic control devices.”

Mr Flatt said the party would continue to use the signs and had told members to be cautious near roads.

“We’re aware of these things but we think this is a little bit of a campaign by National Party bloggers and right-wing groups to take the issue away from the actual campaign.”

So they take the signs down and now say they will continue to use them despite them being a) Against the law and b) a safety hazard.

Labour still isn’t getting it.

There are very serious reasons why there is an international consensus and convention on road signs. For Phil Goff to brush aside the law and say it does not apply to Labour is cavalier to the point of recklessness.

Wikipedia makes it clear why signs have been standardised around the world:

“countries have adopted pictorial signs or otherwise simplified and standardized their signs to facilitate international travel where language differences would create barriers”

As mentioned there’s an international convention on signs:

Road sign standardization was set since language differs in every country so an international road signs was developed and adopted. In fact, during the Vienna Convention on Road signs and signals of Nov 8 1968, 8 main categories were defined.

Why it is important not to copy road signs:

“The shapes and colors of traffic signs have specific meanings and you have to be able to recognize them immediately.  Why? Even if a stop sign is damaged or blocked by dirt or snow, you know by the octagonal shape and red color that you must stop.”

And in the US, three chaps who removed a road sign that led to a triple fatality crash were sentenced to 30 years prison on manslaughter charges.

The reason I mention all this – is because this year, when Labour is ‘blanketing the country‘ with its illegal signs – we’ll have more tourists travelling on our roads than ever before for the Rugby World Cup.  This is a recipe for serious confusion and the NZTA should act.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • abjv

    Ok, I get it. Labour doesn’t want to sell assets (although it looks a lot like previous Labour that did). Ok, no problem, politics is about challenging different ideas etc.

    The benefits of part-selling the assets were described to the public as being:

    (a) give mum and dad (and kiwisaver fund) investors some quality investments on the NZX (given that a lot of what is there is fairly low quality). Give them something to invest in that is in NZ, rather than sending the investments offshore

    (b) raise some much needed cash for the Govt (admittedly while reducing future dividend streams) to pay down some of the debt and/or reduce the amount of borrowing needed for Christchurch. This also means the Cullen fund is more likely to survive, as another way for handling Christchurch is to cash in the Cullen fund.

    Labour doesn’t want to part-sell these assets. Also, Labour wants to keep spending.

    Now for politics, the challenging of ideas. How does Labour intend to beef up NZX to give kiwi investors something to invest in, to keep what equity we do have, in the country? How do they intend to pay for Chch without blowing out all our borrowing limits, or cashing in the Cullen fund?

    I know! They’ll subsidise the two supermarket chains by taking GST off fruit and veges. (GST-exempt; definitely not zero-rated). That will do it, won’t it?

  • reid

    Absolutely correct Cam, it’s a danger during the world cup, and Liarbore pretends it doesn’t get it but instead chooses to munt on about a complete and utter irrelevancy, the possibility that people wouldn’t be taken in by them. Duh Liarbore, it’s not about the words it’s about shape and colour recognition. That’s instant which is what you need when driving. Everyone knows a yellow triangle with a black outline is a warning sign for example. Same with these.\

    Idiots. You’re going to have to burn them all, cause you can’t display them, near any road whatsoever, and guess where they were designed to be displayed? It’s a shame there’s not really many passers-by in the middle of the paddocks miles from nowhere but that’s the only legal place you can put em. Awwwww.

    The mimic of shape and colour with a real stop sign is the reason you designed them like that wasn’t it. Oh it looks just like a stop sign doesn’t it. Get it, Stop-[insert word]-sign. Wink. Oh you must have laughed and laughed at what a clever double-entendre of an idea it really was so eventually after months I bet, of development, one of you mentals finally submitted it to HQ, Andrew took a good long look at it, and ran it by the Caucus. The Caucus gave it the go-ahead, funds were allocated, the presses rolled and the people were informed of a “bit of a clever new campaign in the pipeline, wink wink…)

    In all of this not one not a single one of you dummies everywhere both up and down the entire Liarbore hierarchy EVER thought that maybe you should run it by the legal team. What’s that? You did?

    Crikey.

    What’s that? You just thought you’d better say that to avoid looking really mental and actually, no, you didn’t.

    Oh, OK.

    The fact is it’s neither here nor there that Liarbore has probably already spent its entire incredibly meagre billboard budget on producing them. The point is these monstrosities apparently were designed specifically to break the law, this time, the Land Transport Law. Who knows what they will break next time.

    And this is the party who is seriously looking to convince at least half the country, how competent and responsible they would be, were we to let them run the country?

    • reid

      You’re going to have to burn them all, cause you can’t dis­play them, near any road what­so­ever

      What’s the bet rather than burn them Liarbore will organise a media event whereby their money is disposed of in an enviwonmentally fwiendly way.

      What’s the ipredict stock say on that?

  • kevin

    ‘L’ for bloody losers… what a pitiful crew.

  • mediatart

    Well well well. Whale is leading light of the VRWC nanny state chapter.

    But is good you will spend your time going through the zillions of regulations

    ps I have heard the dunnies in labour HQ are not regulation diameter- send your minions at once to sniff this one out

    pps Any sort of sign on a road reserve is usually a no no, it could be a pink triangle and still ‘not be allowed’

    • Mr. Infinity

      Actually there’s a long history of the right and…y’know…respecting the law.

      • mediatart

        Yeah , thats why Pansy is no longer the MP for Botany, she ‘respects ‘ the law, and why Hide had to ‘pay it back’ , he respects the law too- when hes caught out!

    • abjv

      Why a pink triangle? Have you been listening to Damien O’Connor?

    • reid

      Why it’s simply the law, mediatart.

      Surely you’re not suggesting Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition would even for a moment consider breaking the law? Particularly if it were transparently in order to help it take power?

      I mean how venal could you be, were you to argue for that?

    • reid

      To be quite honest mediatart, given the consequences of someone(s) at some point during the campaign misinterpreting a real stop-sign with one of your fake ones and having an injury or worse fatal accident thereby, I woulda thought the political masters in Liarbore would have said, hold it, right there, as soon as they saw it.

      Imagine if that had really happened in the middle of the campaign.

      It’s a quite obvious risk assessment isn’t it.

      This is what National people and corporates do all the time. All the time. Possibly the fact Liarbore has virtually no seasoned business heads, is a huge handicap. You might want to consider that maybe, it would add value to your party’s constituency, not least in the Electoral Signage Committee.

  • titan

    WE WILL BREAK THE LAW – Vote Labor

    WE WONT SELL ASSETS, TAX THOSE WHO WORK INSTEAD – Vote Labor

    DUH – Vote Labor

59%