Barry Maggie: Hutt City Council (Graffiti Removal) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Barry Maggie: Hutt City Council (Graffiti Removal) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 15 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4420. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I stand now to talk to the Hutt City Council (Graffiti Removal) Bill at its second reading. I spoke at the first reading as well. This is indeed a good piece of legislation because it fills a gap in the law. I think we are all agreed on this side of the House anyway and in the Greens pretty much and possibly even on the other side that graffiti actually encourages even more criminal acts. This piece of legislation allows any graffiti that is visible from a public place be removed. Others have outlined the measures including serving at least 10 days’ written notice to the owner or occupier of the land which does serve to protect property rights in the sense that if the owner does want to be responsible and step forward then that is also allowable. But the owners do need to clean it up. Graffiti does need to go. The zero tolerance that is shown by some councils is I think to be commended. 
This could be a bill that we all watch very carefully. As many others have said before me—and being the penultimate speaker in this most of the points have been made and reaffirmed many times—I think it is very important that we can all learn from this and I will be watching very carefully what the mayor does with this. I congratulate him and the team on having a very good tool to work with. Graffiti has been a very expensive problem for the Hutt Valley. For those of us who know it well it is a place that has been plagued with it for some time. I think that this is the kind of measure and this is the kind of bill that will not only save you $300000 to $500000 a year in the Hutt Valley but also allow people to not gain encouragement from seeing this stuff up on the walls and up on the fences. It does create an air of neglect in a city and it is something that really needs to be addressed. I think of the North Shore certainly in the Auckland area where it is a problem from time to time. 
We will be looking at this bill and seeing whether it might actually be able to be rolled out nationwide and certainly used in other areas. It is indeed an effective new tool and I commend the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee Nicky Wagner for marshalling it through in an orderly fashion. There was indeed a great deal of collaboration and cooperation between the parties. Holly Walker from the Greens had put together a good working definition. I think everyone made a valuable contribution including of course the person who has sponsored this bill the member for Hutt South who is not someone whom I have ever had cause to congratulate on a positive contribution. He is far more usually associated with unpleasant and negative remarks in the House. This may be a one-off. The leopard may change his spots or he may not. I would certainly raise the challenge to him that making a positive contribution in the House and being pleasant and not shouting people down might be something that he chooses to take up because it has worked rather well in this instance. 
I commend the bill. I commend the process of the bill. I think it has worked very well and I commend the bill to the House. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.