Mr MATT KEAN (Hornsby) [4.06 p.m.]: We are committed to ensuring that we crack down on this scourge, which is costing the community about $100 million per annum. It is also costing the community in terms of the amenity and character of our suburbs. The O'Farrell Government came to office in 2011 having made a commitment to do something about graffiti vandalism. What have we seen? Attempts by the Government to do something have been thwarted by members opposite, who do as they always do.
Time and again we have seen Labor members do a deal with The Greens to thwart the wishes of the broader community, which wants to see action taken on graffiti vandals. I invite the member for Maroubra to visit Hornsby and to explain to my community why his party did a deal with The Greens to give the green light to graffiti vandals to continue to ruin our community. It is not on, and that is why I am supporting the amendments proposed by the Attorney General.
Recently, the Attorney General's Office undertook a statutory review of the Graffiti Control Act. The review found that the policy objective of reducing and controlling graffiti offending remains valid. From that review we note there is no accepted definition of graffiti. Community perceptions of it vary. Some members of the community consider certain types of graffiti artistic. However, it is clear that a large proportion of graffiti is considered ugly and offensive by the community; and the Government is committed to tackling this problem. Not only is it committed to tackling the problem, it is also taking steps to do something about graffiti.
Graffiti is a costly problem. In addition to the financial costs associated with the cleanup of graffiti and the use of surfaces that are resistant to graffiti, the chemicals used in graffiti and its cleanup are costly and harmful to the environment. It remains important from a policy perspective to have a clear and distinct set of offences in relation to graffiti to reflect their seriousness and to facilitate proper monitoring of graffiti offending. The statutory review found that the Act could be improved to better achieve the objective. The review noted that statistics from the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research showed that the majority of graffiti acts—approximately 75 per cent of them—were charged as destroy/damage property under section 195 of the Crimes Act rather than under the Graffiti Control Act. The review recommended restructuring and simplifying offences to facilitate increased use of the graffiti-specific offences under the Act.
The bill will amend the Graffiti Control Act 2008 to create a new two-tiered offence of marking. The proposed amendments provide for a basic offence where a person intentionally marks a premises or property without the owner's or occupier's consent, and an aggravated offence where a person does so using a graffiti implement or in a way that means the mark is not readily removed. The maximum penalty for the basic offence is four penalty units, which is a fine of $440, and the aggravated offence carries a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units or 12 months imprisonment. The basic offence is currently found in section 6 of the Act, which also deals with bill posting.
The existing offence requires that the graffiti be visible from a public place. This element has been removed to reflect the criminality of marking offences which, as noted by the statutory review, relate to the lack of consent and not the graffiti's public visibility. The existing requirement that the marking be made by chalk, paint or some other material will also be removed. Unlike the current offence in section 4 of the Act, the proposed aggravated offence does not require the marking to be made by a graffiti implement. The offence can be made out in this way. However, the amendments introduce an alternative; that is, that the marking is not readily removed by wiping or by the use of water or detergent. This new two-tiered offence will be flexible enough to capture new methods of marking graffiti that arise in the future.
The bill also amends section 6 of the Act to create a standalone offence of posting bills. This is currently an offence under section 6 of the Act. However, the section currently also extends to marking. The reforms will remove the marking provisions and they will now be captured by the amended section 4. Section 6 as amended prohibited persons affixing a placard or paper on a premises within view from a public place without the owner's or occupier's consent. The maximum penalty is four penalty units, being a fine of $440. These amendments will facilitate the appropriate charging of graffiti offences under the Graffiti Control Act. This will ensure that the court has the ability to impose a community cleanup order on the offender. It will also enable collection of accurate statistics on graffiti offences and the penalties imposed for such offences.
The bill also contains amendments clarifying and strengthening the court's ability to make community cleanup orders. The bill amends the Graffiti Control Act 2008 to clarify and strengthen the ability of the court to make community cleanup orders. The statutory review found that these orders were not commonly utilised by the Children's Court because offenders were being charged under section 195 of the Crimes Act rather than under the Graffiti Control Act. The review recommended clarification of certain provisions relating to the imposition of community cleanup orders. The amendments to section 9B clarify that a community cleanup order may be made on the application of a prosecutor, an offender or on the court's own motion. The intention is to promote the application of these provisions, and its availability can be raised by any of those parties. The amendments to section 9B also clarify that a community cleanup order can be made before or at the time the court imposes a fine on the offender or at any time after the fine has been imposed but before the fine has been paid in full.
The bill provides that regulations may be made as to the procedure for applying for community cleanup orders to further clarify the process. Currently, under the Act there is no limit on the number of community cleanup hours that can be imposed. However, the statutory review noted that the Fines Act 1996 imposes a limit on the number of work hours that can be ordered against an offender who has defaulted on payment of a fine. The statutory review therefore concluded that these provisions of the Graffiti Control Act operate more harshly in relation to offenders who have not defaulted on their fines than those who have. Accordingly, the amendments to section 9G provide a limit on the number of hours that may be specified on any one community cleanup order. The maximum number of community cleanup work hours that can be ordered to be performed is 300 hours for an adult and 100 hours for a child. Where a child is subject to more than one community cleanup order, those orders can be carried out concurrently. The statutory review found that the absence of a limit on the maximum work hours that can be imposed on an offender means that the current system creates a disincentive for offenders to seek community cleanup orders and does not promote early engagement in cleanup work. The proposed amendments to the provisions governing imposition of community cleanup orders will clarify the existing regime and promote early engagement of offenders in community cleanup work.
There will be a further review of the Act. During the 2011 election campaign the Government made a commitment to tackle graffiti in local communities. Every day of the week I see in my community examples of graffiti crime. I know the cost to the council and the community of cleaning up graffiti. It is excessive. As I have said, it costs the State almost $100 million a year to clean up graffiti that blemishes communities across the State. That is why we need to take measures to address this issue to ensure that people think twice before they commit such acts of vandalism. Graffiti is unacceptable to the community, and this Parliament must take a stand. That is why we are so appalled by the actions of The Greens and the Labor Party earlier this year in the upper House combining to give the green light to graffiti offenders to vandalise private property and trains.
Having been to a recent local area command meeting, I know that the majority of offences in the Hornsby area involve trains parked in the Hornsby train yard. The command notes an offence when it finds graffiti in the yard. The cost to our community is excessive and we must do something about it. It is about time the Labor Party and The Greens joined with the Coalition to take decisive action to fix this problem once and for all. It has been going on for too long, it is costing the community too much, and we are all sick of it.
Read the full Hansard transcript here.
