Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Council Busy Bodies - Road Side advertising and the problem is?

addexstremeIt seems rather ironic given that Cllr Simon Moores earns money from towing ads from a plane without any planning regulations, he is quoted in the council press release on "illegal advertising" so far the examples shown in the media, have yet to harm me in the deep psychological way that it looks to offend Thanet Council officers and those who are attracted to Cllr Moores. Apparently zealous council officers are about to wallop wrongdoers with the full force of criminal law.

Leader of Thanet council Cllr Bob Bayford (who he? exactly) made a good choice in placing Cllr Moores in his cabinet, as he (Simon) appears to be a willing target of or lightening rod for some of the more cranky council policy.

Anyhow this latest bit of nonsense will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of local traders doing what they can to attract business, who apparently dare to park business vehicles on the road, one presumes these are taxed etc. Why a tory council wish's to attack enterprise god alone knows, perhaps Cllr Moores would like to see honest traders criminalised and join the ranks of workless.

So what's the problem, well apparently people can get distracted according to Cllr Moores "As a council, we’re also worried about the impact it could have on drivers, as adverts like this tend to be distracting. We would clearly wish to avoid any potential for an accident, because someone is distracted by an advert, rather than concentrating on the road.”

I'm sure Cllr Moores has never been involved in advertising which could be provocative,  offensive or been in anyway a cheap publicity stunt, I'm sure he seeks local government approval before he interrupts the environment with his plane buzzing around. 

My view is this, if people are so feeble minded they cannot drive past an advert without getting excited then they should not be on the road, let alone as in the case of Moores allowed to fly a plane towing a blimin long advertising banner.

This is for me a typical example of how council's lose control of the fact that their sole purpose is to provide services to the community, no doubt there are some extreme cases of roadside advertising and these should be dealt without the ballyhoo or political codswallop.

It will be interesting come the next election whether Thanet council will be prosecuting local conservatives and criminalising them when the inevitable poster and bill boards appear on farmers land.


  1. This is one of those very rare times that I'm in total agreement with you Tony (& personally I'm far more distracted by short skirts or tight jeans than I am ads).

  2. Small businesses are being regulated to death. Exactly as you say Tony, they want us all dependent on the government.

    I remember visiting several nations of the Eastern Bloc as soon as they opened up and while the youth were busily making the most of their new found freedom, the remnants and effects of the drab, grey, big brother system were still very much apparent.

    I didn't expect to see that ever again, but now it is here in England.

    God help us.

  3. Is M&S' branding at Westwood more or less distractive than a notice stating £10.00 for 25 kg of spuds? So the former has planning consent....that makes it less distractive than the advert for spuds or whatever does it? Prove it. Trying to read what's on the aeroplane banner is far more distractive. Leave people some slack, who cares?

  4. Surely this is a police matter? If the adverts are illegal then it's for plod to deal with. If you follow TDC logic then traders should remove their details from the sides of their vans.
    I'll add nothing about the Councillor - I have already warranted a whole blog from him so I've obviously ruffled his feathers.

  5. I had to contact the council when replacing a church notice board and the regulations are strict but as it was to be a permanent fixture I could understand it, but temporary movable items? As the previous poster said maybe van sign writing should be banned and shop window displays blanked out, floral displays grassed over trees cut down as blossom my distract clouds removed from the sky as they form distractions etc etc

  6. Since 2007 KCC has been making money from roadside adverts and on roundabouts. There were complaints at the time thats such ads were distracting but KCC argued that the evidence showed that accidents do not increase. Now I would be very surprised if anybody would tell their insuracne company that they were looking at a roadside ad at the time of a crash. Likewise if they were looking up at a plane towing an ad.

    So maybe TDC are preparing the ground for themselves to charge would be roadside advertisers.

  7. I think you have moved towards the real issue, Anon 10.35.

    There is some similarity here with traffic/parking regulations. These are often enforced (at quiet times) not because there is a risk of obstruction, accident or even inconvenience to others, but because the written law is offended, and revenues can be secured from enforcing it.

    In the case of these ads, the argument about distraction is clearly a red-herring - why is one ad a distraction and another not?- and is not one of the criteria the Council would consider when handling a planning application. Do they clutter the environment? Possibly yes, but a) no more than the myriad of official road signs and b) this is not one of the arguments the Council has deployed. There are no other arguments here, which leaves the suspicion that there is a revenue opportunity which the Council wishes to exploit.

  8. Some people just exude hypocrisy.

    Things are hard for business not helped by jobsworth council officials.

    Good call

  9. 1219 is quite right - this is all about revenue. Might I suggest that all temporary ads are subject to this assumed tax, based on their distraction factor? The more distracting the ad and the more serious the consequences of that distraction the higher the rate of taxation should be.
    I personally find banners towed behind airplanes very distracting. They're often hard to read and if I'm not careful I find my concentration flagging as I strain to read the message. Such ads should be taxed at the highest rate, although I personally think they should be illegal.

  10. Public spaces are owned by and for the public including the air space. These so called authorities are destroying everything we dont need banners flying over head or any advertisements especially theirs or any corporate bodies. Give us back our roads and countryside and remove the chemtrials from our skies.

  11. Actually in some cases the adverts are distracting as they are overdone and posted everywhere (anyone fail to notice that the Steam Fair was on at Dreamland recently!) However some roadside ads are almost part of the landscape (Nash Farm, Quex barn etc) I can see that eventually TDC want to squeeze revenue out of every advert, however distracting!

  12. See the Doc has a blog on this subject now, justifying the whole stupidity whilst also regaling us with tales of his own derring-do with his own airborne distraction. Doctor Janus more like

  13. All this nonsense the day after front page headlines (Thanet Times) on our rubbish-strewn streets. Why aren't TDC making this a priority instead?

  14. Tax paying struggling business ownerThursday, 9 August 2012 at 21:49:00 BST

    Maybe cllr moore would have all the shops in the high streets remove all signs , house for sale signs, ban skimpy clothing for women etc the list goes on as these are all allegedly distractions for everyone! I think its far more likely that its more dependant upon where the nearest councellors house is situated to the parked signwritten vehicle!