Why spend $30,000 to get rid of it? Why not just leave it there and extend the trial period? Originally I though the trial period was a year, but no it's only a month. It's already a huge attraction, with people there all the time taking pictures. The State roads minister has bloody rocks in his head. Even that State Labor opposition has now called for the thing to be kept, along with the Greens.
The Greens have also maintained pressure to have the crossing made permanent with Greens MP Cate Faerhmann urging Gay to reconsider his decision in Parliament last week.So, according to Duncan Gay's logic, he wants to spend $30,000 to remove it and then look at an assessment about it during the trial period. The assessment will undoubtedly come up positive, and so then to put the crossing back will cost another $60,000 or so. Why not just leave it there while the assessment is completed?
However, during Question Time, Gay stood firm in his decision against making the crossing permanent at least until an assessment is completed at the end of a 30-day trial.
Meanwhile, the Lord Mayor Clover Moore has also written to Gay requesting the trial be extended for at least another 12 months. more
I thought I better take another picture then in case it does end up going. It looks even better now that they've put the other flags back after Mardi Gras too.