PC5 a 'trick'
I am grateful that Keith Garrett (Letters, January 5) ridiculed the idea that Planned Change 5 (PC5) is a "dark plot to curtail freedom of speech" because that is exactly what it is.
The PC5 Evaluation confirmed that current law can't prevent the RDRR's yellow signs which criticised the council's performance. No wonder the mayor and her power bloc worked so hard on PC5 to stop it happening again.
Mr Garrett's "unbiased reading" suggests that PC5 is to prevent "visual chaos". A trivial red herring.
PC5 will actually ban a "community information sign" if it does not relate to "the primary activity on the site". What does site-relatedness have to do with helping people to exercise their sovereignty in a democracy, with the permission of the site owner?
PC5 will require the RDRR to "demonstrate a community benefit of non-site related signs" before gaining resource consent. In a democracy the voters get to judge the community benefit of signs for themselves.
The calls I have had since my letter (December 28) was published can be summarised. Like the gutting of the Community Satisfaction Survey, PC5 is regarded as some by yet another political trick to prevent public comment on council's performance. Try as they might to prevent feedback and accountability, political critique of incumbents can't, shouldn't and won't be restricted to the electoral period. Ban yellow signs and we will dream up alternatives.
REYNOLD MACPHERSON
Rotorua