Borrows Chester: Summary Offences (Tagging and Graffiti Vandalism) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Borrows Chester: Summary Offences (Tagging and Graffiti Vandalism) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 19 June 2008. Volume:647;Page:16798. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 As the last speaker from the Opposition in this debate on the Summary Offences (Tagging and Graffiti Vandalism) Amendment Bill I need to make a number of points. 
People do take seriously the content of the speeches made by previous speakers including Hone Harawira and Nandor Tanczos. However that does not detract from this legislation. To think that passing this legislation which in effect will be unable to stop graffiti is superfluous or meaningless is as ridiculous as it is to think that we can stop poverty by legislation. In actual fact it is just as ridiculous to argue that because people support this legislation they do not care about the causes of poverty and could not recognise them if they jumped up and bit them on the nether regions. The fact that legislation is being made in this way does not prevent the creation of policy and legislation that will address the very real matters that were raised by those previous speakers. 
It was interesting to note that Mr Harawira to underline his point spoke about where graffiti does and does not occur because I had notes along the same lines to underline my points. The fact is that right across the board where offending occurs it generally occurs within the offenders’ own neighbourhood. If we look at where most violent offences occur where most dishonesty offences occur and where most antisocial offences occur we see that they occur amongst the peers of those who are creating the offending. 
I think we should take stock too of the argument that graffiti is a means of self-expression or an art form. The likeness between graffiti and dogs urinating to mark out their patch has been referred to by several speakers. Calling graffiti self-expression is a misnomer because usually the graffiti expresses only the fact that a certain person has been at a certain place in the neighbourhood. So there is a pretty strong correlation between leaving a signature and peeing on a lamp post. Graffiti also frequently includes the initials or insignia of local gangs—sprayed not necessarily by gang members but by people who look up to them aspire to be them or want to use their marks. Swear words are also often used to decorate bus stops walls fences trees etc. So when we look at the purpose of graffiti and the reasons behind it we see that it obviously is not driven by any form of self-expression because it does not leave anything behind that expresses anything other than an expletive or as I said earlier the fact that someone has been there. 
When we look at the neighbourhoods and the locations where graffiti happens we see that it happens in places where people are least able to afford to remedy the graffiti by painting it out or replacing the surface. It also occurs in areas where people are least likely to take the message—if there is a message. If for instance someone sprays on the side of a fence “Mongrel Mob” or “Black Power” or draws a fist or a bulldog the people in that neighbourhood will say “So what?”. If it is supposed to denote that the area is the turf of a particular gang the people most likely to read the graffiti know that it is—or is not depending on the circumstances. Graffiti is most likely to be sprayed in areas where people are least likely to care and least likely to respond. 
A common theme in all of this is that the solution to offending of any kind whether it be violent antisocial or destructive is education. That point is being made right across the House. Just because the answer is education does not mean there is no place for legislation such as this because what are we supposed to do in the meantime? It is all very well to say we can enact legislation we can remove or mitigate or lessen poverty we can enhance education or we can enhance self-esteem by putting in educational policies that teach the sorts of things that have been applauded this afternoon—poi kapahaka karakia waiata and all the rest of it which are terrific. Regardless of what Mr Harawira says every one of us black or white applauds those activities and looks forward to living within a culture where those things are enhanced those things are blessed and those things are valued. In fact after every visit to a kohanga reo or kura kaupapa I am left feeling completely embarrassed by my lack of ability to reciprocate in te reo beyond a few words or a few sentences. I aspire to the day when I can do so fully and meaningfully. 
But I come back to the point: what do we do in the meantime? We need a punitive measure that at least acts as a deterrent because there is an awfully long lag time before we educate people out of doing these things which tend to arise out of where they come from. The fact is a number of young people who are involved in graffiti lack a history of seeing things put right. When we look around the neighbourhoods where graffiti is prevalent we see that other things are prevalent too. There is an abandonment of a sense of responsibility around for instance looking after property whether it be as simple as mowing lawns or removing old cars or cleaning up an empty section or replacing a broken window. We know that all of those things require a bit of money and in those neighbourhoods frequently money is not thick on the ground. And as we have learnt and heard a number of times in this House over the last few days there is an abundance of places where money can be wasted at the expense of nourishing children and family values. 
I remember hearing a school psychologist talk about a family whose septic tank had broken. It was a mucky job and all sorts of muck was left over the lawn. Dad had to go out and dig a hole get bits from Plumbing World and fix the hole in the pipe in order to get the septic tank working properly. Everyone in the household could see that that was what happened. In the same way when a window breaks someone gets a bit of glass removes the putty puts the glass in and fixes the window. Fixing things teaches young people about taking responsibility. Leaving things broken and in a state of degradation only underlines the fact that those people are valueless and can be left to live in a valueless world. I accept that we need to encourage policy that addresses poverty and addresses all the underlying issues that lead people towards offending. But nobody drags them along by the nose and forces them to offend; they offend in response to those underlying issues. We can address those underlying issues in time but that does not take away from the imperative for us in this House to take responsibility for things that are broken—in this case a society that lends itself to the production of graffiti. I am proud that National is prepared to support this bill.