Did Labour check the law?

April 20th, 2011 at 3:19 pm by David Farrar

have been so busy printing up their stop asset sales signs, that I wonder if they have bothered to check the law.  You can see them all planted here next to the road, in the Hutt.

However, the problem for Labour is that displaying something that looks like a road sign, near a road, is an offence punishable by a $150 instant infringement notice with a potential fine of up to $1000.

So what does the law say?

We have a law called Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004 and Rule 3.2(5)(a) appears most relevant:

3.2(5) A person must not install on a road, or in or on a place visible from a road, a sign, device or object that is not a traffic control device, but that:
(a) may be mistaken for a traffic control device

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/traffic-control-devices-manual/docs/draft-tcd-traffic-signs.pdf

It is covered again at Rule 13.7

13.7 Responsibilities of all persons
A person must not:
(a) unless that person is a member of the New Zealand Police, or is authorised by a road controlling authority or the [Agency], install, modify, remove or obscure a traffic control device;
(b) damage or otherwise interfere with a traffic control device;
(c) mark or install, or allow to be marked or installed, on a road, or in or on a place that is visible from a road, a sign, device or object that appears to be a traffic control device but is not;
(d) install a traffic control device that bears a logo, monogram, sign of sponsorship, sign indicating an association with a business, or any information other than that specified in this rule;

Also we have the NZTA Trafiic control devices manual. They even use a non authorised stop sign as an example of an illegal sign. Compare their example below with Labour’s signs.

I think it is a pretty clear cut case. So will Labour say the law doesn’t apply to them, or will they change their advertisements?

Tags: ,

100 Responses to “Did Labour check the law?”

  1. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    The law should come down hard on the socialists and the offenders fined accordingly.
    Once a crook, always a crook.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    Oh jeez my sides are splitting, and I have run out of popcorn, pure comedy gold.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. alex Masterley (1,517 comments) says:

    Is this the politics of stupidity?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Well, someone has to lay a complaint first don’t they? If they’re still there when I get time to drive that way I’m happy to make the complaint myself. I guess calling police is the correct way to approach it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    They really are the gift that keeps on giving arent they.

    Tactical muppets, and they wonder why no one has confidence in them.

    Have Textor Crosby(???) got an office junior they could lend this lot, or even a janitor? It would put them at least 50% ahead of where they are now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ciaron (1,434 comments) says:

    Just weapons grade idiocy…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. m@tt (629 comments) says:

    Shit I think you are on to something. You better make a complaint quick. If we don’t make them stick rigidly to the letter of the law we are likely to have anarchy on our hands. The whole fabric of society could come apart at the seams. Next thing you know they’ll be daring to foment happy mischief.
    While you are at it can you please also make sure that Anne Tolley complied with the letter of the law when she suspended the Linwood College Board of Trustees.
    We can’t have these people running rampant. We must be protected. Let’s get the nanny state ramped up to full speed and squash these evil doers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. wreck1080 (3,923 comments) says:

    nah mate, they’ll just change the law to suit themselves again.

    oops, helen is not in power , too bad. ha ha.

    Incidentally, these signs are a road hazard. But, nothing compared to the hazards of a labour government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Cunningham (844 comments) says:

    Please someone down there lodge a complaint. It would be hilarious seeing the story of Labor being fined for this on the news.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    That looks like $900-$6000 easy revenue gathering for the police, they should be there in a tick.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    Oh come on m@tt…They have stuck their heads up and are getting them shot off, and rightly so.

    Same applies to all politicians regardless of hue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    And yet the Labour-Party person who dreamed up the idea will be told by ‘The Party’ that they are SOOOOOO smart.

    BTW – anyone care to remind them (Labour that is) that a certain Douglas R, Preeble R, Goff P and Clark H (amongst other ‘worthies’) were in government when the last lot of Asset Sales occured. The ‘programme was, I recall, known as ‘Rogernomics’ and was presided over by one David Lange . . ‘

    An ‘inconvenient truth’ perhaps?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. ciaron (1,434 comments) says:

    Anyone driving home that way should stop at every sign, cause a massive jam, then the media will be in there like flies on the proverbial.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    What a shit hot idea ciaron, wish I was down that way. Now that is good tactical thinking!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. m@tt (629 comments) says:

    Oh I agree whole heartedly Lofty. It’s laughable and they should, and will, be lampooned. Unfortunately there are other examples of politicians on both sides bending the law to suit there needs. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy of the post.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    On closer inspection it looks like at least eleven signs there. Not overkill at all. It certainly attracted someone’s attention.

    Labour really think they are onto a winner pushing the “Beware of asset sales” line. Court revenues might end up the winner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    No argument from me m@tt. But it does provide a whole heap of happies for today.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    So will Labour say the law doesn’t apply to them, or will they change their advertisements?

    Neither – they will seek to pass a law retrospectively validating their actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Fisiani (1,039 comments) says:

    STOP
    BREAKING THE
    LAW

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. tristanb (1,127 comments) says:

    I don’t know about others, but symbols like this actually do make me move my foot towards the brake peddle.

    It’s the same with white cars with two ladders lying side by side on their roofrack. When the top steps are painted red and blue they look like a cops from a distance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. peterwn (3,275 comments) says:

    Placing such signs also requires the censent of the local council. In Wellington City, each general and council election candidate has to pay a $200 bond and can only erect signs during the campaign period, then only in specified places.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    Oh bloody hell peterwn, my sides cannot take anymore of this humour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Monty (978 comments) says:

    This is another example of Labour breaking the law and trying to get away with it. Does anyone know if the signs are stil up – or has someone gone and quickly removed them on the back of this post from Kiwiblog?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. lofty (1,316 comments) says:

    If I had to bet on it Monty, I would lay a dollar to a pinch of goat shit, they are well gone by now, but it was fun while it lasted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. ciaron (1,434 comments) says:

    I would lay a dollar to a pinch of goat shit, they are well gone by now
    Perhaps, but photographic evidence lasts forever…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Someone go and pick them all up and bin them… in the interest of public safety.

    Don’t worry matt (who can’t use an normal a like regular people) doesn’t think shit like “laws” really matter so everyone do what the hell you like.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    While not wishing to detract from the well justified chortling at Labour’s faux pas…

    This is another case of “OMG! Teh driverz iz stupid! We must stop them doing everything!11!!!!” from lawmakers. I think people can drive past a stop-shaped sign, set at crotch level on the grass median, and realise it is what it is, without suddenly slamming on the brakes.

    We’re actually quite capable of handling 10km/h over the limit on a dry straight 100km/h road, and holding a phone conversation while driving too.

    I do hope it was during a Labour term that this bit of busy-bodying was passed, that’d make it just perfect. Sadly, though, it could just have easily have been passed at a time National was in power.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Yvette (2,823 comments) says:

    Do they also comply with Election law?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    Labour: “we only follow the law when it suits us”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    Last Chance Saloon for Phil? You’d have to think that Labour can’t really go any lower than this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Do they also comply with Election law?

    Won’t they be ok under the National election law that replaced the Labour whole election year law that would have frowned even more on it?

    Rex, it’s a restriction I think is essential, otherwise there would be all sorts of advertising shit everywhere.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. YesWeDid (1,048 comments) says:

    ‘You’d have to think that Labour can’t really go any lower than this.’

    How about if Labour put up some billboards that liken John Key to Ghengis Khan and Rodney Hide to Mussolini, because last time someone did something like that it worked really well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. jaba (2,143 comments) says:

    it’s just plain farcical what these clowns are doing .. keep up the good work Labour, funny as a fart

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    jaba – that’s hardly fair, I frequently laugh at farts.

    Oh wait, that’s spot on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    That’s strikes 1 to 7 just on one road in Lower Hutt. Go to jail!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Online scam sought funds for illegal activities.

    The Labour Party is going to the public to get financial support for its campaign against asset sales.

    It’s launched an online initiative seeking donations from the public so it can print and distribute “Stop Asset Sales” signs opposing the policy

    It is seeking $10 a sign and Labour MPs are already lobbying the public for help.

    Mangere MP Su’a William Sio and Mana MP Kris Faafoi have already used their Twitter accounts to seek support.

    I wonder if they start another online campaign to raise money to pay the fines.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. 3-coil (1,220 comments) says:

    This is smack-dab in in the middle of Trev Mallard’s patch – did he okay this idiocy, or does he have no idea at all what his brain-dead local Labour Party team are up to?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. giggleatthegaggle (10 comments) says:

    Of course a multi-billion dollar light rail system would mean that these signs wouldn’t violate the law?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    And with the new Police Commissioner, Labour can’t rely on the “not in the public interest to prosecute” deal. Oh dear; how sad; never mind!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Peter (1,713 comments) says:

    The politics of pure idiocy. Not one of them pondered the legality of putting what looks very much like a stop sign next to a road?

    They would practice the politics of envy, but I fear even that is asking too much of this gaggle of morons.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    So much for the left being superior in the blogosphere and social media; that’s the PSA’s “Nice to have …” campaign, the PPTA’s National Standards poll and now Labour’s Stop Asset Sales campaign nobbled by the VRWC in the space of a month!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. berend (1,711 comments) says:

    “The government can do whatever it wants to do,” Helen Clark 1999-2008. Obviously Labour is still in power, this John Key thing is only an interregnum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    “So will Labour say the law doesn’t apply to them”

    Rhetorical question?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    Hang on, shouldn’t there be a notice on the sign saying “authorised by yadda yadda on behalf of the Labour party” and an address?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    If they had printed them in green instead of red, and they said “vote Green” instead of “vote Labour” there would have been no possibility of confusion and consequent possible litigation.

    Labour fails again. Doing their best to send their erstwhile voters off to the Greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    toad said

    Labour fails again. Doing their best to send their erstwhile voters off to the Greens.

    You know that Labour is in the shite when even their main potential coalition partner is bagging them …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    if it was green it would look like a “GO” sign. Would be the first time the Greens ever told anyone they could drive their car…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. big bruv (13,929 comments) says:

    “Labour fails again. Doing their best to send their erstwhile voters off to the Greens.”

    That may well be the case, however we can be thankful that even that message is being ignored by Labour voters.

    Things are not looking good for the Greens Toad, what type of work will Moon bat Delahunty be looking for when she is no longer an MP?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    @ big bruv – Ms Delahunty will go back to teaching at Sue and Bob Bradford’s school for socialists

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. nasska (11,580 comments) says:

    If the Greens get a say so in NZ politics the grass median strip will be grazed by sheep & the road will be a twentyfour lane cycleway.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Where are the transit Nazis, put a sign up in my paddock giving Mallard shit. Transit was around the next day “can’t put that up without a permit”. “Why” I asked “because you need the proper consents and people could be distracted will driving pass as a accident could in sue” , “but” I said “I can drive through the local town and there are thousands of signs there and I don’t see people crashing”. “No sorry you have to get the proper consents, it will have to come down”. I then lost it “look here you fucking tossers if I see you touching that sign I’ll ram my silage forks through your piece of shit and tip it upside down on the main road”. Suffice to say never heard from transit again and the sign remained standing for about three years. So has transit paid these gagglers a visit or are they on the socialist pay packet as I suspect.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    @Pete George:

    Rex, it’s a restriction I think is essential, otherwise there would be all sorts of advertising shit everywhere.

    You don’t get out much I suspect. Not out of insular little NZ anyway.

    Amazingly the Indians, the Asians (with the exception of Red’s beloved Singapore) and the Europeans all bother their drivers less with regulations and more with signage (and bicyclists, and scooters, and the occasional donkey) than do we, yet the result isn’t carnage.

    Give your fellow NZers a little more credit, Pete. We’re at least as smart as all those damn foreigners ;-)

    edit: Go side show bob! That’s tellin’ em.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    “Labour fails again. Doing their best to send their erstwhile voters off to the Greens.”

    too bad they arent going to the greens toad :) bahahaha

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. tristanb (1,127 comments) says:

    Amazingly the Indians, the Asians (with the exception of Red’s beloved Singapore) and the Europeans all bother their drivers less with regulations and more with signage (and bicyclists, and scooters, and the occasional donkey) than do we, yet the result isn’t carnage.

    I see, all those screams of “fucking ***ian drivers” that resonate through private vehicles on Auckland roads and carparks were actually commenting on their good driving? :-D

    From a quick google:

    “In China, “road trauma”… leaves about 50,000 people a year dead – an amount that exceeds the number of deaths (16,000) that die from infectious diseases. The Chinese road deaths are very close to the rates in the United States, but there are only 5 vehicles per 1000 people in China in comparison to the United States with 770 vehicles per 1000.”

    We have road laws for a reason. I don’t particularly want to die in a road crash just because some idiot thinks the speed limit and overtaking rules do not apply to him.

    And I don’t want to rear end some old lady with poor vision who notices the road sign at the last minute and slams on her brakes!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    @dime 6:19 pm

    Early days yet, dime. Just look at what is happening in Germany.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Bevan (3,924 comments) says:

    If the Greens get a say so in NZ politics the grass median strip will be grazed by sheep

    You mean, replace carbon producing planet destroying machines with methane farting planet destroying meat packages?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. noskire (842 comments) says:

    Of course, Labour could be going for the Asian vote and hope that they would pull over and look for the store with all the bargains…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. nasska (11,580 comments) says:

    Bevan @ 6.47pm

    My bad. Do you reckon rice or mung beans would grow at Seaview?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. big bruv (13,929 comments) says:

    Never mid what is happening in Germany Toad, the Greens current poll rating is what should be sending shivers up your spine.

    The Greens normally poll around 8-9% between elections, of course this always drops away by about 2-3% come election day, given that historical fact things do not look good for you guys.

    I can just imagine the great joy that will sweep over NZ when you guys poll 4.5% at the next election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    What’s wrong with you city dwellers, surely there must be someone with a decent set of bullbars on their Remuera tractors.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. nasska (11,580 comments) says:

    …”I can just imagine the great joy that will sweep over NZ when you guys poll 4.5% at the next election.”…..

    The elation as the moonbats hand over the keys to their government supplied cars, the taxpayer funded petrol cards & the Koru Club privileges. The ecstasy that will be displayed by the proletariat as the ex MPs load their personal possessions into black plastic bags, haul their sorry arses out of the Beehive & begin the long donkey cart trek home.

    While enjoying the slow passing scenery & the donkey farts they may have time to reflect that if they had stuck to saving the planet & disassociated themselves from communist social engineers they may have become a political force.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Rodders (1,755 comments) says:

    I2 said “You know that Labour is in the shite when even their main potential coalition partner is bagging them”

    Has Toad ever posted a comment here on a political matter that doesn’t either:
    (a) Praise the Greens
    (b) Deprecate the rest (excluding Hone)
    (c) Both

    Just wondering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    Ahhh so many great comments on here. Something about labour failing just seems to inspire and lift the human spirit!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    @ Put it away; quite so, but Labour is screwing up so often at the momemt that it’s nigh on impossible to gloat in a fresh and original way :-)

    Keep defending them though, but where do you go when the polls go sub-20?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Manolo (13,837 comments) says:

    I can just imagine the great joy that will sweep over NZ when you guys poll 4.5% at the next election.

    Bruv, I’ll shout you a bottle of 15 y.o. single malt if your prediction comes to pass and the Luddites are turfed out. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. big bruv (13,929 comments) says:

    Manolo

    I think the odds are in my favour…

    Tell you what though, I am not much of a drinker these days and have never really been into Whisky, if my prediction does come to pass you can make a donation to your local branch of the SPCA to the same value.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Mr Nobody NZ (391 comments) says:

    Has anybody reported their website to Facebook for inciting criminal behavior?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    So much for the left tolerating free speech; Whale, Jabba amd myself have all been blocked on Labour’s Stop Asset Sales FB page. They can’t handle the truth!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. reid (16,509 comments) says:

    Excellent point Sir Nobody of Monaco.

    They probably just want to stop you from reporting their website to Facebook, I2. Those bastards!

    I wonder how the SST would play that headline?

    Quelle Horreur.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Rodders (1,755 comments) says:

    Look who gatecrashed the Stop Asset Sales meeting!

    http://www.facebook.com/stopassetsales#!/photo.php?fbid=178113085570253&set=pu.177063955675166&type=1&theater

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    I see the Stop Asset Sales fb page “likes” Phil Goff. Well that’s one person who likes him. If he can get a couple of million more he’s in with a shot!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. KevinH (1,229 comments) says:

    The signs are a union inspired creation, they are used when Unite are picketing business sites around the country. The signs are cheap and effective which is why Labour uses them, however the signs placements, along motorways, are illegal. If in the event that the signs were proven to be a contributing factor in an accident then liability for damages rest with the authors.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. AG (1,827 comments) says:

    DPF,

    You also might like to note the Electoral (Advertisements of a Specified Kind) Regulations 2005, Reg 5:

    “An advertisement of a specified kind may not be erected on any road or in any place visible from a road if the advertisement of a specified kind—
    (a) is similar to or the same as any traffic sign in its shape and colour; and
    (b) is liable to be mistaken for a traffic sign.”

    Sure, these regulations only apply in the 2 months prior to an election, but it reinforces the point that even political messages can’t mess with road safety.

    Of course, Labour will no doubt point out that the signs weren’t meant to be set up around the streets as these have been (no doubt by volunteers). And you’ll also note that there’s nothing in the law to prohibit political signs that look like stop signs. And you’ll also note that liability applies to the individual who installs the sign, not the person (or party) that produces them. So, most likely the “will Labour say the law doesn’t apply to them, or will they change their advertisements?” question will be answered “neither – we’ll just tell people to be more careful where they get put (wink, wink)”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. reid (16,509 comments) says:

    Seriously in spite of their bumbling Asset Sales is their main meme this year and how should we combat it since it’s what we want to be doing and should already have been doing a lot of, already.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Put it away (2,880 comments) says:

    I see two of the mongs on that page have a photo of them holding a sign up in the air at about the height of a real stop sign but reckon that’s ok because they’re holding it at a 45 angle so no one will confuse it with a stop sign. Uhhh, a red octagon on a 45 degree angle still looks like a red octagon.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    @ KevinH – the NZTA even has a guide for advertisers as to what is acceptable and what isn’t. It includes this clause:

    An advertising sign or device should not be displayed or constructed where visible from a roadway if it:
    • is coloured red, green, orange, white or yellow in combinations of colours and/or shapes which may be mistaken for a traffic control device

    http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/road-traffic-standards/docs/rts-07.pdf

    Someone within Labour has made a cock-up of epic proportions, and exposed the party to still more ridicule; what a shame!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    @tristanb:

    The Chinese road deaths are very close to the rates in the United States, but there are only 5 vehicles per 1000 people in China in comparison to the United States with 770 vehicles per 1000.

    Aside from the fact that the statistics you quote are 20 years out of date and thus pre-date the time of the Chinese economic boom and the vast increase in car ownership, read on:

    Motor vehicle accidents make up for 50% of deaths in Britain, as opposed to 12% in China. However, the Chinese rates (18.7/100,000) are more than 5 times those rates in Britain (3.4/100,000)

    So more accidents, but far less of them are fatal. Maybe they are all looking at signs and rear ending one another’s cars at low speeds!

    Nonetheless, signs aside, my point that lots of regulations != less serious accidents (which is what we’re told they’re for, after all, not bumps in the rush hour).

    We have road laws for a reason. I don’t particularly want to die in a road crash just because some idiot thinks the speed limit and overtaking rules do not apply to him.

    Then next time, get of out my damn way! :-P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Bevan (3,924 comments) says:

    My bad. Do you reckon rice or mung beans would grow at Seaview?

    Probably, but the conundrum for the greens would be they would have to cut down good CO2 recycling organisms to consume as their food, which would then be digested in their bodies, thus producing methane as a by-product.

    So they effectively turn themselves into methane farting planet destroying meat packages…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. reid (16,509 comments) says:

    So they effectively turn themselves into methane farting planet destroying meat packages…

    I’m pretty sure their research dept would’ve already come up with a solution for that Bevan, but excellent point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Hurf Durf (2,860 comments) says:

    Hahaha, toad. The Greens winning in Germany was a perfect storm, an electorate historically favourable towards totalitarianism suitably frightened by something big and evil overblown by interest groups in the distance and a fringe political party capitalising on their fear and promising to do something about it. Hmm, where have I heard that before?

    However, in the 21st Century people aren’t as consistently dumb. Thanks to the internet the full horrific nature of that ideology can be exposed to a wide audience and, just like in Australia, their support will collapse as surely as night follows day.

    As for Labour, can there be a more useless opposition party in the Western world, anywhere? Canada? They’ve pretty much given Stephen Harper an election to win and a majority to gain.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. burt (8,275 comments) says:

    Did Labour check the law

    I’m sure they did, found it wasn’t convenient and just did what they wanted to do. We saw the same in 2005 with electoral funding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. publicwatchdog (2,613 comments) says:

    Why aren’t National putting up signs or holding placards at intersection pickets which say:

    “Support asset sales!
    Vote National”

    Come on – why aren’t National ‘front-footing’ it on this ‘key’ 2011 election policy?

    John Key was VERY upfront about supporting ‘partial privatisation’ back on 26 January 2011 in his ‘State of the Nation’ speech, and ably supported by Roger Kerr from the NZ Business Round Table for so doing.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/video.cfm?c_id=1&gal_objectid=10702066&gallery_id=116390

    “PM John Key made his state-of-the-nation speech today and has announced plans to sell off parts of state assets and cut back on the rate of Government spending”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10702162

    “Business leaders support partial privatisation of state assets
    3:15 PM Wednesday Jan 26, 2011

    Business leaders are optimistic that a government signal of plans to sell shares in several state-owned enterprises, while keeping a control of them, will be acceptable to voters.”

    Arguably the Botany by-election proved with the 36% turnout and over 9000 (former?) National Party voter ‘no show’ – that ‘government plans to sell shares in several state-owned enterprises, while keeping a control of them’, is NOT acceptable to voters?

    That’s why National spin-doctors(?) moved from describing ‘partial privatisation’ to the ‘mixed ownership’ model?

    All these comments just confirm to me that supporting asset sales is a VOTE-LOSER for National.

    :)

    (I did check the above-mentioned ‘Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004′ for ‘Offences and Penalties’ – but couldn’t find such a section?

    Anybody else found that section? :)

    Anyone actually GOING to make a complaint?

    To whom – upon what lawful basis?

    Or is this just more slightly desperate, empty ‘huffing and puffing’?

    :)

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. reid (16,509 comments) says:

    Why aren’t National putting up signs or holding placards at intersection pickets

    Because we don’t practice illegal behaviour like apparently, evidentially, palpably and undeniably, Liarbore does, Penny.

    I look forward to more of your questions.

    (Or I would if they weren’t always so mental.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. RRM (9,933 comments) says:

    I doubt anyone heading up Waione Street and happening upon that cloud of a dozen or so little red signs is going to mistake them for a traffic signal.

    (Although the retardedness of Wgtn-Hutt drivers should never be underestimated… )

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Did Labour check the law? Maybe they did, it’s not something Phil seems worried about.

    Labour’s asset sales campaign runs into road rule problem

    Labour leader Phil Goff, who launched the campaign last week, said he didn’t know who within his party had put the signs up, “but if the council has a problem of course they can talk to whoever might have put them out”.

    While the signs were modelled on stop signs “nobody’s going to mistake it as a stop sign, that’s just silly”.

    “This is just the National Party highly embarrassed by the fact that most New Zealanders don’t want asset sales and the Labour Party is standing alongside New Zealanders in that view.

    “In fact we’re leading the push back against the assets sales. That’s why they’d love to see us not have the chance to get our message out there.

    “We’ll keep using those signs. If the council’s got a problem we’ll listen to them of course, but nobody thinks they’re going to be a traffic hazard, that’s just nonsense.”

    The campaign was a bit nutty, against something relatively minor that is on a suggestion so far. But Goff demonstrates again why he is unfit to be leading Labour. Sounds like he’s right behind the campaign, and not able to admit he’s stuffed up – again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. ciaron (1,434 comments) says:

    Lairbore form: hang the minion out to dry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Peter (1,713 comments) says:

    “In fact we’re leading the push back against the assets sales”

    Just like in the 80’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Ryan Sproull (7,205 comments) says:

    I think that while no sane English speaker with the eyesight necessary to drive would mistake the campaign signs for street signs, the reason signs are recognisable shapes and colours is because non-English-speaking drivers need to be able to quickly see what a sign means without having to read unfamiliar words and letters.

    It’s conceivable that an accident could be caused by a tourist thinking they were supposed to stop in the middle of the road for some reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. JWM (6 comments) says:

    The difference between the Stop Asset Sales Campaign Signs in Petone and the sign from page 21 (Photo 4.2) of the Traffic control devices manual is that the Stop Asset Sales Campaign Signs would never actually get mistaken as a stop sign, certainly in that example. They are not at stop sign height and they are not at a place where a driver would confuse it for a stop sign. By contrast the sign from the Traffic control devices manual looks to be specifically imitating a stop sign in a way that will very easily confuse drivers. You can’t see how high it is or its placement but that’s a pretty safe assumption.

    No one in their right mind could say with a straight face that the Stop Asset Sales Signs signs will get mistaken for a stopsign.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Batman (103 comments) says:

    So these signs were on the eastern end of Waione St, as we know. this is on my commute to and from work which i do every day. the signs appeared last thursday (14th April) and were there for only one day as far as i know. The photo only shows some of the signs, I would estimate that there were around 30 or 40 lining the grassed area, facing either way.

    I wondered at the time whether the signs were legal, but along the lines of electoral law rather than traffic law. they appear very similar to stop signs but would not be mistaken for them due to the sheer number of signs. And lets not forget that they are WRONG anyway! they government isn’t actually selling any assets, merely offering people a minority share in the companies! Silly Labour, they will probably cop hefty fines for a bunch of signs which aren’t even correct!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    Labour have shown there is an authorisation notice on at least some of the Stop signs – although you might have to stop and get out of your car to have a close enough look to be able to see it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. trout (939 comments) says:

    The loveable Andy Knaksted from the LTA has opinionated that the signs are in breach of the law. A spot fine of $150 per sign should solve the problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    That is the most obscure authorisation statement (per Pete’s link), so much so that it seems to be taking the piss.

    It seems to say Authorised by Chris Flatt, 160 Willis Street, Wellington.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    And this promoter statement still seems in breach of the rules:
    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0087/latest/DLM3486967.html?search=ts_act_electoral_resel&p=1

    204F Election advertisement to include promoter statement

    5) If the election advertisement is published in a visual form, the promoter statement must be clearly displayed in the advertisement.

    I would say the promoter statement is deliberately obscure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. trout (939 comments) says:

    Labour party signs on road sides are being removed after complaints being laid with Local Authority. Cannot the Party get anything right? Cockup after cockup – who advises these people? It would seem to be very easy to check out legality before embarking on a campaign. It just further convinces voters that this Party lacks the expertise to run a country. If they spent less time on petty personal attacks (helicopters, rich pricks etc.) and focused more on strong policy, forward planning, and fiscal rectitude perhaps the polls would look bretter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. slightlyrighty (2,475 comments) says:

    JWM.

    Consider a person driving down a road lined with Labour ‘Stop Asset Sales signs. This road ends with a stop sign. The driver, having passed sign after sign after sign of a uniform shape and colour, see’s the shape and colour of a real stop sign, but has seen so many other signs, he assumes it to be the same, and has an accident.

    Sounds silly, but stranger things have happened with regard to traffic accidents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Courage Wolf (557 comments) says:

    If the council has a problem of course they can talk to whoever might have put them out. But nobody’s going to mistake it as a stop sign, that’s just silly. This is just the National Party highly embarrassed by the fact that most New Zealanders don’t want asset sales and the Labour Party is standing alongside New Zealanders in that view. That’s why they’d love to see us not have the chance to get the message out there. Nobody thinks they’re going to be a traffic hazard, that’s just nonsense.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    CW – do you think it would be fine if anyone put up signs that look similar to stop signs anywhere they please, except maybe at intersections? If it’s good enough for Labour electioneers then it must be good enough for any business or organisation to do it.

    But open slather would be just nonsense, wouldn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Nookin (3,354 comments) says:

    Courage:
    The point about stop signs is that they are of universal shape and colour. People don’t actually read the words. Foreigners may not necessarily understand them. The sign itself is the direction. Labour have admitted that they deliberately made the signs to resemble stop signs. It was deliberate, unlawful, arrogant, dangerous and downright bloody irresponsible. All of the epithets that have typified labour for 12 years in fact.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Courage Wolf (557 comments) says:

    Haha, you guys just got trolled:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10720719

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote