Ms McGurk questions the Minister for Transport about the removal of small static signs, contrasting it with the approval of a large video screen on a freeway. The Minister denies involvement and refers to standard procedures for removing illegal signage.

AnsweredQoN 571Legislative Assembly
Asked
11 August 2015
Portfolio
Transport

QuestionView source ↗

PERTH FREIGHT LINK — SIGNAGE REMOVAL
571. Ms S.F. McGURK to the Minister for Transport:
I have a supplementary question. Can
the Minister for Transport, with a straight face, claim that small static signs
on the side of the road should be removed because they are distractions when
his government approved a massive, moving video screen above a busy freeway?

AnswerView source ↗

Sometimes supplementary questions
are asked and members have not listened to the answer. As I said, my office has
had nothing to do with the removal of any signage. I know that both local
government and government agencies, particularly Main Roads, will remove
illegal signs from major main roads and applicable state roads, irrespective of
what they are. I know that during election campaigns corflutes have been removed. I do not necessarily agree with it, or whatever, but it is
an operating aspect of a government agency, and if they are acting in
accordance with the rules and regulations that exist, I will not interfere with
that. However, I acknowledge that if the department rips a sign off someoneXXX ###XXXs wall, that seems to be taking it too far—that
is, if it is a government agency that is actually undertaking that, and I
cannot say that for certain.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more