MOUNT BARKER, MOVEABLE SIGNS RESTRICTIONS

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:04): I move:

That council by-law No. 2 of 2009 of the District Council of Mount Barker entitled Moveable Signs Restrictions, made on 17 May 2010 and laid on the table of this house on 25 May 2010, be disallowed.

The arguments are similar to those that I have raised earlier in this session regarding some other councils that have brought in by-laws relating to moveable signs. Mount Barker by-law 10.2 states:

A person must not, without the council's permission, display a moveable sign on or attached to or adjacent to a vehicle that is parked on local government land (including roads) primarily for the purpose of advertising or offering for sale a product (including the vehicle) or business to which the sign relates.

As I have said previously, I want this issue to be focused on the two key elements: safety and damage to council property. However, what we have now is that the City of Onkaparinga moved a motion the other night. I think councillor Apap sought to have the by-law removed or rescinded, but the council chose to refer the matter to police for them to enforce it, basically.

I have already told the council that I spoke to Senior Sergeant John Illingworth, one of the police traffic experts, who told me that he regarded this measure as 'petty', and that was the word he used. He said the police would act in relation to any person parking a vehicle in a dangerous position or in violation of the safety code. They do that, anyway. So, I do not think that is the answer.

I have corresponded with the Minister for Local Government (Hon. Gail Gago) because I think she was fed some incorrect information, and I offered to provide her with the names and addresses of the people who contacted me who are just ordinary citizens doing simple things such as leaving a car out the front of their house while they are having renovations done.

She has said to me in a reply (and I am paraphrasing) that she will work with the LGA to try to ensure that a by-law is applied appropriately. I do not think that is the answer, either, because, if you have a wording there, an enforcement officer can use that to carry out what the wording actually says. If we have to have coaching schools or a special provision for people to interpret by-laws or other laws, I think that is not the answer.

What I want is for the LGA—and this is where I think it could take a leadership role—to develop a template by-law which is specifically focused on the two aspects of safety impacting on pedestrians and other road users and damage to council property. If someone parks on a council reserve and damages the reserve, they should be pinged for that. If someone parks a car to sell it and it is in a dangerous location, they should be pinged for that.

What I am trying to do with my opposition and motion to disallow these regulations is not to take away from councils the power to have a sensible enforcement. What I want is sensible enforcement. The same by-laws of these councils allow people to put up other signs. As I said last time we met, you can put up a garage sale sign but you are not allowed to sell what is normally in the garage by putting it on the side of the road. Land agents can put up signs and people in election mode can put up signs. I think in a democratic society we have to be fair and reasonable about this because the people who are getting caught at the moment and paying a fine of $100 are not hardened criminals.

So, I move this motion, and I hope that in due course the councils, with the help of the LGA and the minister, can come up with a by-law—and this is where the skill of the drafting lawyer is important—that will deal with this issue. I was talking to a senior member of the Public Service the other day and he said something came to his attention where a council wanted to ban anyone who amplified music near a beach, and he said that meant no-one would be able to wear a hearing aid because that is what a hearing aid does. I am not trying to be cute about this, but it is a very difficult job to draft by-laws or laws. I was pleased to see that our Richard Dennis was acknowledged in the Queen's Birthday honours because he and the others are very skilful drafters of legislation.

I am asking that we go back to the drawing board for all these councils and get a template by-law drawn up that tackles safety and damage to council property. Let's avoid going down the path of trying to follow in the steps of Mussolini and people like that. I move the disallowance of the motion.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (11:10): On behalf of the opposition in my role as spokesman concerning local government issues, in this instance we indicate that we will support the honourable member for Fisher in his motion to disallow this particular by-law. We have done some research ourselves on this issue, consulted with the LGA and other parties and, as the member for Fisher has outlined, the crux of the matter in relation to the by-law concerns the words 'primarily for the purpose of advertising or offering for sale a product (including the vehicle)'.

I drove past a car that I presume was immediately out on the road verge in front of the owner's home by the front gate and it had a for sale sign on it and a telephone number to contact. Under these proposed by-laws, the council could impose a fine on that person. I am with the member for Fisher in relation to this. I think it is too broad a brush approach, if you like, and as such—that is a bit of a play on words, isn't it?—we are prepared to support the member for Fisher's motion. We have consulted with the LGA, as I said, and I quote from some information that we received:

The LGA believes the wording of the by-laws could be improved to provide greater clarity, specifically 'primarily for the purpose of selling' needs to be defined, as well as what factors will guide Councils when they apply that test.

Whether the member for Fisher is accurate in terms of describing coaching of council staff and the like, I do not know. One of the LGA's roles in my opinion is to provide support to individual councils, and I see the LGA actually carrying out that function in relation to its view concerning this issue in terms of the by-laws.

When we come to debate the other motions for disallowance, we will deal with them obviously on an individual basis but, in this instance, we are prepared to support the motion of the honourable member for Fisher.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Sibbons.