Ms Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham & Morden, Labour)

The new clauses will give local authorities the power to remove graffiti from street furniture owned by statutory undertakers such as the public utility companies, British Telecom, Telewest—the cable providers—and the railways. There is some confusion about their wording, but I want to make it absolutely clear that they relate not to individual shopkeepers or shop owners but to statutory undertakers—large multi-million pound companies whose business involves a large amount of street furniture that is subject to graffiti which is often left for weeks, months or even years without being cleaned.

We all accept that graffiti is a growing problem, whether or not we have it in our constituencies.

Certainly, 61 per cent. of the people who live in my suburban borough regard it as a problem. In one ward in my constituency—a very suburban area that one would never regard as inner city or suffering from inner-city type problems—in a survey of 232 households, 204 regarded graffiti as one of the main issues that affect them and their local area. The Greater London Authority conducted a survey in which it found that three quarters of Londoners believed that graffiti had an impact on their quality of life.

We also know that there is a correlation between graffiti and feeling safe about living in one's home and about walking in the street at any time of day. We are also gathering evidence that suggests that the more regularly graffiti is cleaned away, the less likely it is to return and the less likely people are to tag street furniture or cover it in graffiti.

Sergeant Stanhope, who runs Merton's very successful graffiti and fly tipping scheme, said:

''The main findings of the FLAG project were that when an area is cleaned 93–95% of that area remains clean. The length of time that the area remains clear has varied from a few days to nearly a year. When graffiti is removed rapidly it decreases the chances of it returning.''

See this speech in context