HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-09-26 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Business Signage

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:12): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister representing the Minister for Planning questions relating to the display of signs in business premises in South Australia.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: I was contacted by a constituent in recent days regarding an absurdity he faces in the operation of the Development Act and corresponding regulations with respect to signs being displayed within his business. In this individual case, we are talking about a business set-up cost in the order of $8 million. From my understanding, this gentleman has a small flashing sign inside his business that can be seen from the road, which, by displaying the word 'open', indicates that the business is open for trade, nothing more.

The use of these types of signs, of course, is common practice amongst business owners in South Australia and elsewhere. It is not a visually obstructive sign in this case; it poses no danger whatsoever that I can see. As I have said, it is a relatively small sign, being about the size of a shoebox. What is of great concern to myself is that this gentleman has been told he is required to remove the sign because the requisite planning approval has not been granted by the local council for the display of the sign. This is bureaucracy at its finest. It offends common sense, in my view, that a small sign should require council approval. Moreover, it potentially stands in the way of South Australian trade, and it certainly stands in the way of this individual's business.

Not only has this business owner been prevented from advertising his business as being open for trade, but requiring council approval can directly impact the local sign makers who actually provide this sign and no doubt many other signs for businesses across this state. In this case, it was provided by a local sign maker. Furthermore, he was told that it would be January before he could receive approval for this, in this case. My questions to the minister are:

1. For what legitimate purpose would a council need to approve a small sign located within a premises that is, as I said, approximately the size of a shoebox?

2. Will the government commit to resolving this regulatory absurdity? It can do so very easily. It doesn't require legislation and it is, of course, contained in the regulations of the Development Act, so the minister can change it very, very quickly.

3. What is the government doing to ensure that small to medium businesses aren't burdened with unnecessary red tape in relation to planning and development, as is highlighted in this instance?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Employment, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (15:14): I thank the honourable member for his question. I will take those questions to the minister in another place and bring back an answer. Perhaps if after question time the honourable member would like to give me details of the specific individual, that I understand for good reason he did not name, we can have that looked into in that individual case as well as the three questions that he has asked.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT