Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 12 Hansard (Thursday, 20 October 2005) . . Page.. 4056 ..
• The 2005/06 budget does not detail a separate amount for path maintenance other than the Footpath Maintenance initiative of $665,000. $527,916.94 has been spent on path maintenance so far this financial year.
• No there is a backlog of path maintenance projects.
Graffiti(Question No 652)
Mr Pratt asked the Minister for Urban Services, upon notice, on 21 September 2005:
• Further to the Minister’s media release of 16 August titled “Program to literally colour in Canberra!” where it stated that “The development of artwork on public and private assets that are prone to illegal graffiti is one approach to reducing its incidence”, what other approaches is the Government undertaking at present to reduce the incidence of graffiti;
• Could detail be provided regarding the success of these other approaches and the cost of each approach;
• Have the severity of fines or convictions increased since 2001-02; if not, why not;
• Is there any empirical evidence to suggest that the use of artwork on public and private assets reduces the incidence of graffiti in Canberra; if so, can that evidence provided; if not, why not.
Mr Hargreaves: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
• The Government is undertaking a comprehensive proactive approach to graffiti management as outlined in the ACT Graffiti Management Strategy, that seeks to strike a balance between prevention, removal, diversion, community awareness and involvement, and legislation. The Strategy is available at http://www.parksandplaces.act.gov.au/policies/graffitistrategy.html
• The ACT Graffiti Management Strategy was released in August 2004 with many actions commenced. Due to the short period for which many of these actions have been implemented, few have yet been subject to comprehensive evaluation.
The Graffiti Art Workshops conducted in 2004-05 through a partnership with Urban Services’ and Arts and Recreation Training ACT were evaluated following the completion of the project. Evaluation showed that the project achieved the following outcomes:
• Youth at risk of illegal graffiti were successfully engaged.
• Highly motivated participants benefited and improved their art skills and became more confident in their social interactions. Some students continued on to further art education within their limited budgets.
• The workshops provided an environment conducive to learning about graffiti and the law and also introduced students to safe art practices.
• Work on public murals enabled increased contact between the target group and other members of the community to help break down social stereotypes and improve relationships between the two groups.