More Auckland idiocy
What is in the drinking water up in Auckland?
The latest nonsense is Auckland City Council wanting to ban billboards from the central city!!
They claim it will make Auckland more of an international city. Is this the wisdom gained from the $84,000 junket around Europe?
I like billboards – they add colour and often wit to a city. I can’t believe the Council thinks it has nothing better to do than banning stuff like this.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Local Body Politics
December 13th, 2006 at 9:55 am
Obviously this is a Labour plot designed to prevent National from crucifying Clark and Co with more wonderful bill boards. Having screwed up the stadium deal, Hubber and Huckard have to do something useful for their gongs.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:08 am
You have to love it, all the socialists at each others throats. Boy this city is becomming an embarrassment to the whole country, prehaps streets like you see in North Korea would be more to their liking, with 100 meter posters of Dear Leader with large banners telling the people to “move on” and other such words of wisdom.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:17 am
Another crazy idea. A dangerous mix of chardonnay socialists and slightly deranged post-menopausal women are wreaking havoc in the Auckland City Council.
Is Mayor Hubbard showing any leadership at all?
December 13th, 2006 at 10:20 am
Since Auckland cities real inflation adjusted operating budget must be 400-500% that of the early 1990s I guess they need something to with all that lovely money. 1000 billboard ban enforcers should sit quite nicely.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:47 am
If you’ve seen the wonderful film Good Bye Lenin!, you will remember the statues of Lenin being removed from East Berlin and replaced with enormous Coca-Cola banners. It seems Auckland would much rather travel in the opposite direction.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:49 am
That seems a stupid idea, however its Aucklanders who constantly bitch and moan about content of the billboards – remember the autotrade “we’ve got rides for dirty bitches”
So i guess the council’s arguments is that its what the people want
December 13th, 2006 at 10:49 am
They spent $84,000 and missed out on Times Square? One of the most vibrant cities in the world. Or Piccadilly Circus? Mind you, what is your definition of a bill board? I would look sideways at those that I used to paste up when I worked for NZR many years ago, but the modern illuminated ones I glance at in passing are quite different if the purpose is similar.
Perhaps they are thinking as a road safety measure with the density of traffic in Auckland?
December 13th, 2006 at 10:51 am
They spent $84,000 and missed out on Times Square? One of the most vibrant cities in the world. Or Piccadilly Circus? Mind you, what is your definition of a bill board? I would look sideways at those that I used to paste up when I worked for NZR many years ago, but the modern illuminated ones I glance at in passing are quite different if the purpose is similar.
Perhaps they are thinking as a road safety measure with the density of traffic in Auckland?
December 13th, 2006 at 10:52 am
They spent $84,000 and missed out on Times Square? One of the most vibrant cities in the world. Or Piccadilly Circus? Mind you, what is your definition of a bill board? I would look sideways at those that I used to paste up when I worked for NZR many years ago, but the modern illuminated ones I glance at in passing are quite different if the purpose is similar.
Perhaps they are thinking as a road safety measure with the density of traffic in Auckland?
December 13th, 2006 at 10:56 am
Adolf has it got it in one.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:58 am
Why don’t they put a billboard up in South Auckland ,maybe outside Banjo’s place saying;
Stop hitting babies on the head with hammers .
December 13th, 2006 at 11:09 am
These people are worse than moronic tossers.
Take a look st those hideous, downtown apartment buildings which you have allowed, and destroyed the entire landscape of this once, beautiful city. You bastards!
December 13th, 2006 at 11:11 am
The only ‘international’ cities I’ve been to that don’t have billboards everywhere are Damascus and Tripoli. Aucklanders should be proud to follow their lead.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Seeing as Auckland City Council is going to ban ugly bill boards, one then needs to control the all aesthetic values of the city, the civic structures (roads, water towers etc) the architecture, the vehicles and the people as well. Ugly people will need to be banned too as to ensure the City has that international flavour.
Now, I am all for banning ugly people from the CBD. Just think of the benefits!
Less traffic, fewer crimes (only ugly people commit crime, have you noticed that?). Ugly people will need to move to Maukau or south of the Bombay hills, there by lessoning the traffic flow into the city. Companies with ugly bosses will need move out for the city (Wellington has lots of ugly people, maybe they can move there) putting less demand on the civil structures of the CBD. No ugly power lines.
At some point the make up of city council will change as ugly people will not be welcome.
Yes, I believe we need more aesthetic control of the Auckland CBD. With fashion police everywhere, handing out fines to all of the ugly people.
I myself, being ugly, will have no reason to do business in the CBD as all my business is done with ugly people. I am happy to leave Auckland to the beautiful people.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:56 am
If we’re going to ban ugly people you’ll have to start at the very top in Auckland city!
December 13th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
Seeing as Auckland City Council is going to ban ugly bill boards, one then needs to control the all aesthetic values of the city, the civic structures (roads, water towers etc) the architecture, the vehicles and the people as well. Ugly people will need to be banned too as to ensure the City has that international flavour.
Now, I am all for banning ugly people from the CBD. Just think of the benefits!
Less traffic, fewer crimes (only ugly people commit crime, have you noticed that?). Ugly people will need to move to Maukau or south of the Bombay hills, there by lessoning the traffic flow into the city. Companies with ugly bosses will need move out of the city (Wellington has lots of ugly people, maybe they can move there) putting less demand on the civil structures of the CBD. No ugly power lines.
At some point the make up of city council will change as ugly people will not be welcome.
Yes, I believe we need more aesthetic control of the Auckland CBD. With fashion police everywhere, handing out fines to all of the ugly people.
I myself, being ugly, will have no reason to do business in the CBD as all my business is done with ugly people. I am happy to leave Auckland to the beautiful people.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:03 pm
That was like the wankers that would only allow the ‘right kind’ of people into their Viaduct Harbour establishments during the Americas cup.
How do we deport all the above posers, lefty half-witted city councillors, egg-crate apartment building designers and Auckland politicians who allow their own constituents to be fucked over for political point scoring?
The hitchhikers guide to the galaxy treatment of documentary makers and telephone sanitisers comes to mind.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:10 pm
Auckland is good at deporting mayors – I cant remember when we had the same one twice in a row. They all get in saying they wont raise rates and they all shaft us senseless.
I haven’t partaken of a Hubbards breakfast since I gagged reading the “its just a one off for infrastructure” scam.
Funny the every tax or rates hike is just a “one of for infrastruture”.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:17 pm
If, by colour and wit, you mean huge pairs of barely covered tits advertising Shortland Street or a fuckin’ cellphone, then yeah – the bilboards are BRILLIANT.
Heaven forbid people manage to escape being bombarded with manipulative bullshit for five minutes as they walk down the street.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
That seems a stupid idea, however its Aucklanders who constantly bitch and moan about content of the billboards – remember the autotrade “we’ve got rides for dirty bitches”
So i guess the council’s arguments is that its what the people want
Posted by welly_girl | December 13, 2006 10:49
I like dirty bitches and I dont ever recall moaning about them.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Its not just ‘billboards’ they mean the ones the size of the titanic which cover entire sides of buildings. And for commercial reasons there are probably more in Auckand CBD than the rest of the country put together.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
Forgive me for stating the obvious…. but aren’t the ugliest billboards put up my councillors themselves everytime they want to get themselves re-elected?
December 13th, 2006 at 2:10 pm
With any luck we won’t have to look at Dicky’s ugly face – surely he must know the writing is on the wall(!) already.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
looking at our buildings (the Council approved) I’m glad there are Billboards covering them. And, yeah, who are these people complaining about Billboards? I’ve never met any.
December 13th, 2006 at 4:44 pm
What did Bill Boards do to get banned from the central city?
December 13th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
We got a lazy pack of wankers in council with a 50% rates increase sitting around with nothing better to do than dream up taliwhacker regulations. Sound familiar? it was either that or tax pipi farts but they thought the latter sounded too sensible.
December 14th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
Of all the loony ideas, this one takes the bikkie.
Two small thoughts: The Civic Theatre is designed to display a billboard on the front, vertically under the clock. When it opened in 1929, it had a billboard there. It still does, and it still should for ever.
The St James is currently covered by a billboard where the late Sir Bob Kerridge promised there would be a fine statue in Italian marble. If that profitable soft drink advert is taken away, Aucklanders will be able to feast their eyes on the rusting remnants of signs for the Regent, Westend and Odeon cinemas that aren’t there any more, and the crumbling stucco of the theatre and office building. Such a disgrace to the owners, who are – golly gosh – the Auckland City Council.
Auckland City government is among the worst I’ve ever seen in the world. It has for many years been dominated by small-minded. self-seeking miserable and stupid men and women with no real vision for the city and a desperation to get their sad little names on something that will be there, covered in seagull shit and graffiti, long after they have gone.
I am convinced there is an Uglification Committee that has already made its impact with all those awful broom-cupboard apartment buildings and surprisingly hasn’t been put in the stocks and pelted with rolled up copies of failed proposals for unwanted stadiums. Or stadia, if they’re heavier and would hurt more.
Auckland City Council, all by itself, gave the city Aotea Square, that third-rate imitation of communist East Berlin’s Alexanderplatz, that at least had the Berolina buildings and the makings of a decent transit system to its credit. Cold, windswept, unattractive, surrounded by buildings in the High Mediocre style…
Down at the other end of Queen Street Auckland City Council created the bizarrely, almost uniquely awful, Queen Elizabeth Square, windswept, randomly full of rickety buses coyly hiding their destinations in case a passenger should happen by.
And the Britomart Terminal – a most elegant and beautifully designed subway station that lacks only a subway to make it complete.
December 14th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
Despite finding this thread full of embarrassing Auckland-envy, I agree with the sentiments. Billboards are interesting, Auckland architecture is mostly not. More big jugs for the guys, and more sixpack abs for the girls and girlyboys sounds good. More clever jokes, colorful displays, and helpful reminders of various products. Tastes differ, but Auckland’s very gaucheness is part of the character, why take it away? If you don’t like billboards, don’t look.
.
I’d be sorry to see ‘The Vegas Girl’ go
May 31st, 2007 at 11:09 am
wgnepomrs wpedu ncbowzdp isfd cjfni jqhgeom dqgj
May 31st, 2007 at 11:12 am
wgnepomrs wpedu ncbowzdp isfd cjfni jqhgeom dqgj