3 ms·

They could do nothing and just let the art exist for free.

benj111 3mo ago
Half this cost is related to security to actively stop people looking at the art work. If it's not acceptable for banksy to cost tax payers £50k to remove the graffiti, why is acceptable for the powers that be to waste another £50k on security to stop anyone seeing it? And if that ruins the character of the building, why is the fence acceptable?
- nprateem 3mo ago
  Probably to stop people rocking up and cutting them out of the buildings
  - Lalabadie 3mo ago
    That's true, though it's worth noting that Banksy's pest control – the people who certify that an artwork is legitimate – will always identify anything not meant to be sold as a fake, so resale is a lot more limited than anything meant for galleries and auctions.
tptacek 3mo ago
They can't. It's a listed building. They're legally obligated to remove it.
- Schiendelman 3mo ago
  Absolutely not. There is no enforcement mechanism to punish them if they chose not to enforce the listed building rules.
  - tptacek 3mo ago
    In the sense that they are the enforcement mechanism of the law it's true that they can probably just ignore the law to a point, but it's no use pretending that there isn't a legal stricture here. (I'm a policy opponent of historic preservation, which is a major impediment to housing reform, but even I don't pretend that it simply doesn't exist.)
    - Schiendelman 3mo ago
      Agreed, btw - I think the only method of preservation should be market purchase, to force the right tradeoffs.
  - scott_w 3mo ago
    Just to be clear, you're asking the Ministry of Justice, the department responsible for maintaining the court system, to break the law? I can't think how that could have horrendous long-term consequences...
    - Schiendelman 3mo ago
      There are tons of laws they simply don't enforce. This would be one more.
      - scott_w 3mo ago
        Which laws? Who is "they?" Be clear.
- mrkeen 3mo ago
  Let them apply austerity measures then.
  - ForOldHack 3mo ago
    This thread should be nominated for the best of Hacker news.
Georgelemental 3mo ago
Not free, at the cost of the beauty of the vandalized area
- 6510 3mo ago
  Demolish the building leaving only the wall then make a park around it and name it after the guy who ordered the demolition.

Half this cost is related to security to actively stop people looking at the art work. If it's not acceptable for banksy to cost tax payers £50k to remove the graffiti, why is acceptable for the powers that be to waste another £50k on security to stop anyone seeing it? And if that ruins the character of the building, why is the fence acceptable?

nprateem 3mo ago
Probably to stop people rocking up and cutting them out of the buildings
- Lalabadie 3mo ago
  That's true, though it's worth noting that Banksy's pest control – the people who certify that an artwork is legitimate – will always identify anything not meant to be sold as a fake, so resale is a lot more limited than anything meant for galleries and auctions.

tptacek 3mo ago

They can't. It's a listed building. They're legally obligated to remove it.

Schiendelman 3mo ago
Absolutely not. There is no enforcement mechanism to punish them if they chose not to enforce the listed building rules.
- tptacek 3mo ago
  In the sense that they are the enforcement mechanism of the law it's true that they can probably just ignore the law to a point, but it's no use pretending that there isn't a legal stricture here. (I'm a policy opponent of historic preservation, which is a major impediment to housing reform, but even I don't pretend that it simply doesn't exist.)
  - Schiendelman 3mo ago
    Agreed, btw - I think the only method of preservation should be market purchase, to force the right tradeoffs.
- scott_w 3mo ago
  Just to be clear, you're asking the Ministry of Justice, the department responsible for maintaining the court system, to break the law? I can't think how that could have horrendous long-term consequences...
  - Schiendelman 3mo ago
    There are tons of laws they simply don't enforce. This would be one more.
    - scott_w 3mo ago
      Which laws? Who is "they?" Be clear.
mrkeen 3mo ago
Let them apply austerity measures then.
- ForOldHack 3mo ago
  This thread should be nominated for the best of Hacker news.

Georgelemental 3mo ago

Not free, at the cost of the beauty of the vandalized area

6510 3mo ago
Demolish the building leaving only the wall then make a park around it and name it after the guy who ordered the demolition.