The O'Farrell government complains that its graffiti bill suffered some amendments after being mauled in the Legislative Council last week. It would seem that they thought that it would be useful to allow magistrates to take away the driving licences of graffiti offenders, and that somehow this would reduce the level of graffiti being done.

It is a little difficult to see graffiti as being the most pressing matter on the agenda of the State government. Certainly it is an annoying problem. Taking away someone's driver's licence for graffiti offences does not seem entirely useful though. These points were raised by the Labor party and others. I think it would not be an overly bold assumption to make, that most graffiti offenders are juveniles who don't hold licences. If some hapless pizza delivery boy should trespass into the field of graffiti on his days off, it is hard to see how taking his driver's licence away will rehabilitate him. If anything, those extra hours which could have been spent delivering pizzas might end up being devoted to some less socially acceptable activities.

If taking away licences was a good idea it could be applied to any sort of offence I suppose. If some middle aged man or woman was convicted of shoplifting would it make any sense to take away their drivier's licence? The previous Labor State government did its best to ensure that young people would have difficulty getting licences by making them complete 120 hours supervised driving instruction. In many states of the USA a period of 50 hours is considered sufficient. As a result, they need a fair amount of motivation to get the licence in the first place.

However, perhaps the real importance of the graffiti bill lies not in its particular fate, but in what it signifies about the Coalition attitude to the Legislative Council. In that respect maybe the writing is on the wall, as they say.