3 ms·
It also says "East Suffolk Council told Eastern Daily Press: "While we are naturally disappointed by the reported removal of the Banksy seagull from the side of
by arp242 3y ago
It also says "East Suffolk Council told Eastern Daily Press: "While we are naturally disappointed by the reported removal of the Banksy seagull from the side of a building in Lowestoft, it is ultimately the right of the owner to make decisions about their own property."
As I read it, I don't think anyone from the city council forced them to do anything, "could put a preservation order on the piece" doesn't mean they did.
It's all a bit unclear though what the exact situation is though and why they chose to spend £200,000 instead of £200 on some paint.
- xeromal 3y agoWhy would they feel compelled to make that threat? lol
- arp242 3y agoIt's not clear to me it even was a threat; the context of that comment is entirely unclear. It's possible the couple just asked what could be done about the situation and the council responses with "well, we could put preservation order on it, but you'll be on the hook for protection then". Given the later "it's their property and right to do with as they want" comment, I think something along those lines is more likely, but hard to be sure. The reporting on all of this has not been of stellar quality.