Graffiti: Opposition Policy

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE (Drummoyne) [3.34 p.m.]: I move:

That this House:

(1) condemns the policy vandal, the shadow Attorney General, for his outrageous claims concerning graffiti;

(2) calls on the Leader of the Opposition to either endorse or sack his shadow Minister; and

(3) congratulates the Iemma Government on effective and considered initiatives to reduce graffiti.

Graffiti is a difficult crime to tackle. It is a clandestine activity committed in the dead of the night and in hidden-away places. Accordingly, although our hardworking police charged more than 12,000 people with property damage offences in 2006, identifying and tracking down offenders can be a difficult task. It is therefore necessary to use a range of different strategies. That is why the Government has a comprehensive plan for dealing with the problem, which includes putting in place tough laws to deter vandals; restricting access to spray-paint cans by requiring retailers to keep their stocks in locked display cabinets, with fines for sales to juveniles; and establishing an Anti-Graffiti Action Team comprising major government agencies, public utilities and industry representatives to lead the development and implementation of anti-graffiti policies.

Last year the Government introduced new laws giving police the power to confiscate spray cans from juveniles if they do not have a lawful excuse for possessing them. Police are also working to identify graffiti hot spots and increase surveillance and enforcement. For example, between 10 May 2006 and 31 December 2007 the Police Rail Vandalism Task Force arrested 470 offenders for committing more than 980 offences, including malicious damage, graffiti and trespass in the rail corridor. The Government is always refining our approach to preventing graffiti. We recently set up a pilot project to assess three popular graffiti-reduction interventions. Some $360,000 in grant funding was provided to help seven local councils implement rapid removal crime prevention through environmental design and volunteer projects. Grants were awarded to Sutherland Shire Council, Wollongong City Council, City of Canada Bay Council—which is in my electorate—Blue Mountains City Council, Penrith City Council, Leichhardt Municipal Council and Gosford City Council. These grants not only are designed to help reduce graffiti in those communities but will provide the Government with hard data on what sorts of initiatives work in preventing graffiti vandalism. That data will help to inform future strategies.

This demonstrates that the Government is committed to initiatives that are proven and cost effective. It is a shame that the same cannot be said for the Opposition. On 22 May the Dubbo Daily Liberal reported that the shadow Attorney General, the member for Epping, had suggested that rewards of up to $2,500 should be offered to people who report graffiti vandalism. The shadow Attorney General's suggestion followed praise for a scheme run by Dubbo City Council that involved offering rewards of up to $2,500 for information leading to the conviction of any person or persons who commit wilful damage. According to the article, the shadow Attorney General suggested that the program was "so good" it should be applied widely across the State. [Quorum called for.]

[The bells having been rung and a quorum having formed, business resumed.]

It is shame the shadow Attorney General is so intimidated by our motion of priority today. He repeated the sentiments he expressed in the House last week, that this is a policy that could be used all across the State. Since the inception of the Dubbo Reward Program not one person has received a reward. Astonishingly undeterred, the member for Epping in his speech to the House last week acknowledged that when he said, "The beauty of Dubbo's policy is that it has reduced the impact of vandalism in the community without paying out even one reward." One has to wonder at the logic behind such self-contradictory nonsense. Let us suppose for a minute that his scheme works. The costs of the scheme to offer rewards of up to $2,500 to whoever reports graffiti would blow out to monumental levels. In fact, last year there were 10,265 proven charges and on that figure we have costed a rewards scheme, paid by taxpayers, at $25.7 million. Instead that money could be applied to resourcing our police, councils and community groups. The member for Epping has suggested that we use $25.7 million of taxpayers' money to fund a program that may not work.

Mr GREG SMITH (Epping) [3.41 p.m.]: There is a saying, "When the paint hits the fan from a leaky spray can, call D'Amore." When I want to scrape the bottom of the can—

Mr David Campbell: Point of order: Time and time again those opposite complain and argue.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! What is your point of order?

Mr David Campbell: The point of order is that if the member for Epping wants to make a substantive attack on another member he or she has to have a substantive motion. My point of order is the hypocrisy of the Opposition on these matters and the fact that time and time again points of order are taken on that issue.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member for Epping to bear in mind the point raised by the Minister for Police.

Mr GREG SMITH: I am flattered by the attention that I receive from Ms D'Amore and from my good friend the Minister for Police.

Ms Diane Beamer: Point of order: The member for Epping is well aware that in this House the correct form is to address members by their title, not their name.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I remind the member for Epping that that is the correct form of address under standing orders.

Mr GREG SMITH: The community of the Epping electorate and various other electorates in this State have been savagely let down by this competent Government. To illustrate its incompetence the Government has moved this spurious motion on the last day before this Parliament rises when members of the Government move off on their overseas trips.

Ms Angela D'Amore: Where are you going?

Mr GREG SMITH: I am not going anywhere. I am working in my electorate. I note that on 8 May the member for Drummoyne went to Amsterdam, Milan and Rome at a cost of $50,000. I have not cost the electorate anything of that sort at all.

Ms Angela D'Amore: Point of order: My point of order is based on relevance. I want to hear what the member for Epping can contribute to this motion of priority. I ask you to bring him back to the motion.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Epping is well aware of what is required.

Mr GREG SMITH: A number of municipalities in this State have been so desperately worried about graffiti and have offered rewards. Last week the Labor Council of Parramatta resolved to offer a reward of $1,000 for each successful court conviction to bring a greater willingness in the community to get involved. Interestingly the Government made such a fuss about its special court at Parramatta. What happened to the toilets in that special court? They were graffitied, despite the bragging of the Attorney General that there were 100 security cameras to protect members of the public. The deputy lord mayor, my good friend Pierre Esber, a member of the Australian Labor Party, was photographed with a sign advertising the $1,000 reward to help stem graffiti because this Government has not offered any assistance in our electorates.

In Epping Rotary has a project to help remove graffiti, assisted by Parramatta council. In Dubbo a $2,500 reward has been offered but not taken up. The council spent $220,000 in the last financial year to remove graffiti, an escalation in cost from the previous year. Since the reward was introduced the damage cost decreased to $33,000, so the program has had an effect. I suggest that the Government might want to be involved in such campaigns. In my local area a $5,000 reward has also been offered by the Weekly Times. Is this Government attacking those initiatives by citizens and companies? Is this Government saying that I should not support my constituents, and municipalities in this State, just because I am a member of the Opposition and the shadow Attorney General? Does the Government have to stop me and humiliate me? I have thick skin.

Recently Kelso Public School in Bathurst was burnt down. The Government has not stopped that from occurring. Dubbo has a solution that has received good publicity. Hunters Hill is being graffitied. The Government's token solutions are getting nowhere. The community is sick of this Government because it has not done very much at all about graffiti except use the valuable time of this Parliament to move a motion to try to condemn a member of the Opposition who applauds good citizens and good councils. When the member for Drummoyne leaves Parliament at the next election she will realise that her voters were not happy because she did not do enough about graffiti and she supported a Government that wants to waste 12 weeks of valuable time instead of governing and improving matters. Now that the Government is at the bottom of the spray can her voters will reject her. They will say she could only criticise our good councils and citizens who tried to clean up the mess. We have helped to create this mess because graffiti offenders are not given proper punishment but merely slapped on the wrist, which does not deter them. The people of Drummoyne, Epping and other electorates will say that at least the coalition tried. They support the efforts of members of the Opposition who put their money where their mouth is.

Ms DIANE BEAMER (Mulgoa) [3.48 p.m.]: I support this motion. The Iemma Government is committed to a range of effective strategies for tackling graffiti vandalism. Unlike the Opposition, it is not about making reckless and costly commitments that simply will not work. Instead, the Government is delivering on local projects that give communities the support they need to get results in the fight against graffiti. This has included a number of funded projects in my electorate of Mulgoa. Last year the Attorney General provided a grant to Penrith City Council to implement a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design graffiti reduction project in Glenmore Park. Penrith council selected stone retaining walls at a local park as a reduction site. The walls had been the subject of a lot of graffiti that would be costly to remove.

Following that consultation with nearby local sporting groups, schools and shopping centres, council planted green screening walls across the site and that has been very successful in stopping the site from being graffitied. Council is also patrolling the site to monitor vandalism and has contracted a service to remove graffiti as it occurs. Penrith City Council last year applied to the Government to raise its rates to fight graffiti across its area. I would also like to note some of the other positive initiatives being undertaken by Penrith City Council to combat graffiti in the local community. Council has a hotline and people are rewarded not in cash but by the fact that someone from the council is able to come out and effectively remove graffiti. The council put extra resources into graffiti management and removal and used a "Report it, don't ignore it" program to encourage the reporting of graffiti to local police. It set up a free-call graffiti reporting hotline as well as an online community facility for reporting graffiti. There is also a graffiti removal information package that provides tips to residents on graffiti removal and prevention.

Penrith City Council is one of the many councils across the State taking advantage of the Government's program to force offenders to do graffiti clean-up work. It also received another grant from the State Government for the Queen Street, St Marys project. That project allowed an artist to paint roller doors at night with murals. These murals have never been touched with graffiti. They have been a tremendous success. In fact, this airbrush artist was able to show young people the value of work on roller doors to prevent graffiti. It is a cost-effective strategy and a focused plan for reducing graffiti vandalism in the Penrith local government area. The shadow Attorney General would do well to visit Penrith council to see for himself the good work that the council is doing in partnership with the New South Wales Government and the local community, who fully support and promote the hotline that council set up. [Time expired.]

Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON (Castle Hill) [3.52 p.m.]: I have been in this place for 15 years and I have never seen a more preposterous priority motion brought before this House. It is absolutely extraordinary to think that, according to the member for Drummoyne, the member for Epping should be criticised to the extent that he should be sacked for standing up for his local community and for the Dubbo community. Let us look at what he had to say. He talked about congratulating one of his local papers for starting a graffiti vandalism campaign by offering up to $5,000 to local residents who dob in a vandal. He said:

John Booth, Ulrike and all the team at the Weekly Times should be congratulated on their wonderful efforts to try to clean up the streets of the electorate of Epping

He also congratulated Dubbo City Council for its similar efforts at reducing graffiti vandalism. I note that Dubbo City Council has reduced its cost of cleaning up graffiti from $204,000 in 2006-07 to $33,000 for the first nine months of 2007-08. This is a real triumph. The Government should be lauding that achievement. Clearly, what the shadow Minister has been saying has a lot of merit. This policy could be rolled out across the State because it has a great deal of merit. It does not surprise me that this Government should have brought this rubbish motion before the House. This is the Government that for 10 years, from 1996 to 2006, refused to endorse my lock-up legislation. In 2006 the Government finally endorsed it. The former member for Penrith derided my original legislation as rubbish and nonsense in 1996. Ten years later the Government embraced it with both arms. What do we see today? The Government is deriding the very worthwhile proposal by the member for Epping to do something about this scourge. It is worse than that. I have had a look at what the member for Drummoyne had to say about graffiti in a previous debate in May 2006. Here is what she said:

When I discussed this issue with the police in my electorate, one of the measures they said is most important is that residents and businesses should notify the police and local councils where graffiti occurs and take a photograph of the tag.

She is now condemning the member for Epping for advocating what she advocated two years ago. She went on to say:

That will assist the police and local government agencies to identify common tags on the database and coordinate removal of the graffiti, which is an extremely effective strategy

I commend local councils on doing a good job

That is exactly what the member for Epping has been doing—commending local councils on doing a good job. While I am talking about local councils, the member for Mulgoa spoke about the only strategy she could find that the Government has employed in her area, which is to allow Penrith council to raise rates to clean off graffiti. That is their strategy. [Time expired.]

Ms MARIE ANDREWS (Gosford) [3.55 p.m.]: It gives me great pleasure to speak in support of the urgency motion moved by my colleague the member for Drummoyne. Unlike the previous speaker, the member for Castle Hill, I consider this motion to be quite important because graffiti is becoming a big problem in every area of the State. Sadly, that is the case in my electorate of Gosford, which has benefited immensely from the positive and proactive programs put in place by the Government to prevent graffiti vandalism. Last year Gosford City Council received a grant to implement a graffiti reduction project. The project was aimed at reducing vandalism at a well-known graffiti hot spot, a local youth centre. The centre is near a park and has minimal natural surveillance. Research shows that areas of poor surveillance are often targeted by graffiti vandals. Poor lighting and visibility allows them to hide in the shadows while they commit their self-proclaimed "art".

With funding from the Government's grant, the council has introduced a combination of landscaping, additional lighting, fencing and upgraded surveillance equipment to deter vandals from targeting that site. Council also utilised native plants in a green screen. Monitoring is being undertaken at the site by council staff. Gosford City Council is one of the many councils across the State taking advantage of the Government's program to force offenders to do graffiti clean-up work. The Government believes that criminal offenders should make reparation to the community for their actions. Engaging such offenders in graffiti clean-up work is a great way of doing this. The Department of Corrective Services and the Department of Juvenile Justice work in partnership with local councils such as Gosford council to engage community service order offenders in graffiti clean-up work. This is a very positive way of addressing the problem we are facing. This not only forces local criminals to face up to their behaviour but also delivers tangible benefits to local communities in my electorate of Gosford.

Fighting graffiti vandalism demands targeted, considered and cost-effective initiatives. I am pleased to inform the House that Gosford City Council has in the past received funding from the State Labor Government to purchase a special machine to assist council in its fight against graffiti, which is, quite simply, antisocial and unacceptable behaviour. This is exactly what the Iemma Government is delivering in my electorate of Gosford—positive action to combat the increasing problem of graffiti. I take great pleasure in commending the motion to the House.

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE (Drummoyne) [5.57 p.m.], in reply: I thank the members for Mulgoa, Gosford, Epping and Castle Hill for their contributions to this debate. I note that the Leader of the Opposition has not been in the Chamber to support his shadow Attorney General. Obviously, he has lost some favour with his leader and his party room, which is very interesting to see. Going back to some of the comments—

Mr Daryl Maguire: The Premier is not here to support you either.

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE: He is watching, don't you worry.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wagga Wagga will not walk into the Chamber and interject.

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE: We are used to it, Mr Deputy-Speaker. He can be a philistine when he wants to be.

Mr Greg Smith: Point of order: The point was taken against me that I should describe members by their seat names. I take the same point of order against the member for Drummoyne.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. The member for Drummoyne will refer to members appropriately.

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE: Thank you, Mr Deputy-Speaker. The program that was raised by the shadow Minister—Parramatta council's offer of $1,000 for every successful conviction—has some merit because it relates to a successful conviction, not someone picking up the phone and reporting an incident. Also, Castle Hill referred to some of my comments. We all know that any area commander you speak to will tell you—

Mr Michael Richardson: Point of order: I am not "Castle Hill", Mr Deputy-Speaker; I am the member for Castle Hill. I ask you to direct the member to address members properly.

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Drummoyne will refer to members properly.

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE: The member for Castle Hill referred to my comments on graffiti. Any commander you speak to will tell you that one of the crime prevention strategies with graffiti is to actually report it and remove it within 24 hours. A number of councils around the State would support those comments. I am glad that he put those comments on the record again because many people would agree with them. I refer to the grants outlined by the member for Mulgoa for her local area. What this shows is that the State Government is looking at proactive strategies in providing grants to our local community via our councils to make sure that we are patrolling sites and removing graffiti quickly, and we are running education campaigns throughout our community showing when to report graffiti, how to report it, and to take pictures.

These are successful and extremely effective programs. Programs are being funded in our local communities to educate youth and show them that they can turn their vandalism into art and make it proactive in the community. I thank the member for Gosford, who outlined a number of projects occurring in her local area with Gosford City Council and the grants received from the State Government to purchase machinery to remove graffiti. I note that the shadow Minister's policy would cost ratepayers $25.7 million, which is slightly outrageous. That is money that could be better channelled into local councils, grants and resourcing local police.

Mr Greg Smith: Point of order: The policy of course—

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The debate is concluded. Points of order should be raised during a debate, not after it.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.