Many months back, we began to undertake the task of entering correspondence with each and every one of the London councils with the aim of finding out where the legal walls are in the city. The reason for this was to end Internet rumours of people being arrested at Leake Street and South Bank (most likely an untrue story, or at least very rarely occurring incident), as well as clearing up misunderstandings at Sclater Street and other popular spots in London.

During the time in which we were endeavouring to get information out of the councils, one of our own lads was reported by a PCSO (pffft) whilst painting at a spot he was certain was legal. A couple of court dates later and no further action was taken by the Crown Prosecution Service, the police even returned his tins. This highlights the need for clearer guidelines for those who for whatever reason (be it getting older or personal choice) don’t want to have run ins with the law when painting, and so that busy bodies and do gooders cannot persecute those who have made the choice to avoid breaking the law by painting legally.

Here are the somewhat mixed results of our project:

INNER LONDON BOROUGHS

Borough: Camden
Council’s Response:

Thank you for your enquiry. I have forwarded your e-mail to the relevant
department who will respond directly.

Our Opinion: There never was any response from another body. They obviously don’t take their residents questions very seriously.
Result: Unsure. There may or may not be legal spaces in Camden. The area of grass just before the end of Camden (that has been thought to be legal for many years) is now fenced off with barbed wire.

Borough: Greenwich
Council’s Response:

Firstly may I apologise for the delay in getting back to you.
Having made enquiries about this, we have no legal walls within borough and apart from murals that have been commissioned in the past, we have no record of Greenwich ever operating a scheme like this. We also have no intention of introducing anything to this effect.

Our Opinion: After a long wait, a disappointing result. At least they were courtious enough to respond. Still, that will be of no consolation to residents who wish to peruse their creativity legally, will it!
Result: There are no legal walls in Greenwich.

Borough: Hackney
Their Response: None whatsoever.
Our Opinion: Hackney council didn’t even humour us with a response. Very poor form.
Result: Unsure. There may of may not be legal walls in Hackney. No one was willing to confirm or deny the status of any spot in Hackney.

Borough: Hammersmith And Fulham
Council’s Response: Hammersmith And Fulham did not respond.
Our Opinion: This is very disappointing. The council failed to respond to our email, we have waited months.
Result: Unsure. We can neither assure you that any spot in Hammersmith And Fulham is legal, nor can we inform you that it isn’t.

Borough: Islington
Council’s Response:

Firstly, please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your enquiry. The formal answer is there are no legal area for graffiti within the Borough of Islington. However, I am aware there are areas that are perceived as “legal” due to the fact there has been very little action taken at them during the years. Two of these are Holbrooke Court and Parkland Walk. You mention in your enquiry about walls being declassified, as they were never formally classified in the first place this does not apply.
I am aware that there is a train of thought that legal walls can help in the production of graffiti art. Unfortunately experience also shows us that where there are legal walls there are also incidences of illegal graffiti that lead to them. There are also health and safety issues regarding legal walls. If a Local Authority grants a legal wall then they would have to assume responsibility for activities that go on there. I have personally removed metallic car spray paint from an 11 year old who was spraying a legal wall in another borough. He had no mask or gloves on and was inexperienced and therefore getting the spray into his face.
I am however fully supportive of legal activities where boards or canvasses are erected and young artists are taught the correct and proper way to improve their art. We have supported a number of these initiatives in Islington.
In relation to your very valid point of legal area being changed without warning, this is not something that I feel should happen. Even in Islington in what I would call the “tolerated” areas of Tufnell Park and Parkland Walk, if there was going to be a change in the way they are dealt with then there would be both signage erected to warn of this as well as a period of understanding applied.
As for graffiti being carried out on private property with the owners permission, I would advise you that the Council does have the power to instruct removal of this if it is deemed detrimental to the environment. This would obviously only apply to graffiti that is visible from the Highway in our case.
I hope this goes some way to answering your enquiry but please feel free to contact me directly if I can provide any further information

Our Opinion: The gentleman from Islington council took the time to send us a personal and specific response, and we really appreciate that. This is the best response we got from any council, and speaks wonders about the way they interact with their residents. It’s a shame that health and safety as well as responsibility for the surrounding areas means that the council can’t legalise walls for fear of creating problems for themselves. The information about Holbrooke Court and Parkland walk is positive, although due to the nature of “tolerated” areas, still slightly unclear. Top marks to Islington for their pro-active response and for at least attempting to give clear concise information.
Result: Holbrooke Court and Parkland Walk are not legal. They are however, tolerance areas and it is therefore implied that you could paint there in the daytime without fear of arrest. It is not without risks though, as in theory, you could be arrested there if the authorities were out to get you for less legal work. For example, an arrest here could lead to your house being searched, the aim being to find evidence of you painting panels for example. This is very unlikely to happen, and for those who only want to paint legally, shouldn’t be a concern.

Borough: The Royal Borough Of Kensington And Chelsea
Their Response:

Thank you for your email. We have forwarded it to the Arts Department for their attention and asked them to reply to you.

Our Opinion: We are still waiting for the Arts Department’s response, months later.
Result: Unsure. No one would tell us where, if anywhere, it is legal to paint in Kensington and Chelsea.

Borough: Lambeth
Council’s Response:

Many thanks for your email. As far as we are aware, there are no official permission or legal graffiti areas in the borough but, there are three main designated areas that are owned / managed by other organisations where no action is taken by the Authority, police and landowner when graffiti is put up.
These are:
* Leake street – (owned by British Rail Residuary Body) under Waterloo Station, where the Banksy organisation manage the area.
* Under the Queen Elizabeth Hall at the South Bank – where the South Bank Centre allows graffiti
* Stockwell Skate Board Park – Managed by Stockwell Park Estate Management Board

Our Opinion: A positive response from Lambeth council. Although Leake Street, South Bank and Stockwell are not officially legal, the council have confirmed that the authorities do not take action against those who paint there. We aren’t lawyers, so we can’t say this wouldn’t hold up in court if it came down to it, but chances are you won’t have problems painting at any of those three spots, as even the housing associations are in on it. This should put end to rumours of police arresting people painting at Southbank and Leake Street. Also, Lambeth have confirmed the (now fairly open) rumour that Banksy still has some control over Leake Street (ever since “Cans Festival”). Good to see he is using his fame and money to put something back! Also, well done Lambeth for having three tolerated spots where some boroughs can’t even manage one.
Result: Leake Street, Southbank and Stockwell are not officially legal, but the council confirmed that the authorities do not peruse cases when people paint there. These seem to us to be the least risky places to paint in London.

Borough: Southwark
Council’s Response: No response. Southwark couldn’t be bothered to respond to our questions about legal walls.
Our Opinion: It is very disappointing that they didn’t even respond to our email. It shows a lack of interest to the residents concerns.
Result: Unsure. There is no one from Southwark council who is willing to clarify if and where there are legal walls in their borough.

Borough: Tower Hamlets
Council’s Response:

Thanks for your email. This was forwarded through to us in the arts and event team, and although this is out of our remit, I did manage to track down a colleague in LET (Local Environment Teams) who clarified that there is actually a zero tolerance policy on graffiti in Tower Hamlets. There is a policy which is in development and it is likely that there will be some provision for artists on council owned property, either through officially sanctioned public art or designated free walls – though this has not yet been cleared internally and therefore no space has been identified. Sclater Street therefore remains an ‘illegal’ site for graffiti. I can appreciate that there is some confusion around this, not least because private developers do sometimes allow hoarding etc. to be used. In the meantime, there may be some ‘free wall’ space at Mile End Park, but this is at the discretion of the park management and you would have to contact the director of MEP directly.

Our Opinion: We appreciated the full response to our question from Tower Hamlets council, though we were disappointed to hear that there is no legal space in their borough, and new policy will most likely be slow to come about. They did well to come right out and define that Sclater Street is well and truly illegal, though this is also a disappointment. As for painting Mile End park, it seems a little strange to have to email for permission before painting the wall, but that is the permission system they have in place.
Result: There are no legal walls in Tower Hamlets, though provisions for such may be in progress. Mile End park is not legal, but you could be given permission via email. Sclater Street is illegal and should not be painted by those who are trying to paint legally.

Borough: Westminister
Council’s Response: No response whatsoever.
Our Opinion: Very disappointing.
Result: Unsure. No one was willing to respond and confirm or deny the existence of a legal wall in Westminister.

Borough: Lewisham
Council’s Response:

Within the borough of Lewisham I am only aware of 1 official permitted graffiti wall. This wall was built as part of a regeneration project of a green area in Bellingham. It is my understanding that the wall is still in use and has not been decommissioned. I am not aware of any other legal graffiti walls in the borough

Our Opinion: Result! Finally a straight answer out of one of these councils. Also, well done Lewisham for having a legal space.
Result: Bellingham is legal. No where else is. Simple.

OUTER LONDON BOROUGHS

Borough: Bromely
Response:

Extensive research has been done nationally and internationally regarding the provision of legal/permission graffiti walls but having looked into the advantages and disadvantages of providing legal walls in the borough, Bromley Council has decided against it for many reasons, including the following:
· Legal walls make it very difficult for the police, because if they “stop and search” someone, they do not know if they are carrying a spray can to do graffiti on a legal wall or illegal graffiti on someone else’s property.
· People may use the walls as practise canvasses but once they have legally practice their “art” may then start doing illegal graffiti elsewhere.
· Once the legal graffiti wall is full, the graffiti can spread to surrounding sites.
· Legal walls can attract vandals from other areas and they also provide a place for taggers to meet and discuss criminal ideas.
· By providing graffiti walls it could send out the wrong message: that illegal graffiti is acceptable.

Subsequently, whilst there are a few commissioned murals in public places within our borough, we do not currently have any legal graffiti walls and I am not aware of any that have been “declassified” in the past.
I have referred your email to our Planning section to find out the position of doing any “artwork” on private property that is either on the public highway or visible from the public highway (i.e. planning permission legislation) and will contact you once I have received their response.

Our Opinion: This is a very disappointing response. With mentions of legal walls “filling up” and writers have to move onto surrounding walls, they clearly show very little understanding of the culture they are speaking so negatively of. The comments on legal walls meaning the police can’t tell who is carrying paint to do legal graffiti and who is carrying for illegal graffiti shows a lack of understanding of how the law works too. Bromley council are clearly clueless on the matter. They will be glad to hear I for one will never be living in their borough.

UPDATE:Just got another message from Bromely council. Note the use of the word “artwork” in “inverted commas”.

Further to my email, I have been advised by our Planning Department that if anyone wishes to do any “artwork” on property that is on the public highway or visible from the highway he/she would need the permission of the property owner and may also need planning permission – things like where the property was located and the subject matter of the piece would need to me taken into account. It is therefore difficult to give a definitive answer as each application would need to be considered on an individual basis, however any queries regarding a specific address within the borough can be sent to our Planning Department via planning@bromley.gov.uk

Result: There are no legal spaces in Bromley.

Borough: Redbridge
Council’s Response:

Thank you for your e-mail. Whilst I am not aware of any provision of “legal walls” in Redbridge, I have forwarded your e-mail to my colleagues in Culture Sport & Community Learning, who are responsible for such sites as skate parks and play areas, in case this issue has been raised in the past. I have asked them to contact you direct should they have any further information.
I hope the above is of some assistance.

Our Opinion: A pleasant enough response, but I’m still waiting for mail from the Culture Sport & Community Learning team… months later.
Result: Unsure. The person who replied to my email was unsure on the matter. The person who was supposed to send more information never did.

Borough: Wandsworth
Council’s Response:

Further to your email, I can confirm that Wandsworth Borough Council has a Zero Tolerance Policy on graffiti. Therefore, we do not have any council owned “legal walls”/”permission walls” in the borough. We remove any graffiti reported to us within 3 working days, or within 24Hrs if it is racist/offensive/abusive. We also work closely with the schools and police in the borough to discourage graffiti vandalism.

Our Opinion: This response from Wandsworth’s “Graffiti Administrative Assistant” was very disappointing, but at least they replied quickly and answered the question directly. It turns out, if you are in Wandsworth and want to paint graffiti, you need to visit another borough or risk painting illegally.
Result: There are no legal walls in Wandsworth. They have a zero-tolerance policy against graffiti.

Borough: Enfield
Council’s Response:

Unfortunately Enfield Council does not have this facility within the borough. However if you find a private building/wall and have permission of the owner. You can then use said building/wall.
Our Opinion: A simple enough response, there are no legals, but they do not have a problem with commissions (whereas other councils have expressed that is these are seen by the public, they need to be authorised)

Result: No legal walls in Enfield, no plans to get any.

Borough: Newham
Council’s Response:

Thank you for your email received by Customer Services. Your email has been forwarded to the Leisure/Planning Departments who will respond directly to you shortly.

Our Opinion: Surprise, surprise, Leisure/Planning never got back to us.
Result: Another council has made it impossible for us to inform their residents of whether or not the spot they are planning on painting is legal or not.

Borough: Merton
Council’s Response:

We acknowledge receipt of your email. Any queries raised will be dealt with as soon we are able to do so.

Our Opinion: Bollocks you will. Still waiting months and months down the line.
Result: Unsure. No official word from Merton council. Who knows if anywhere in Merton is tolerated.

Borough: Brent
Their Response:

Thank you for your communication. I have spoken to someone in our Parks team and she has confirmed that
unfortunately there are no “legal walls” where such artwork can be done in Brent. The walls do have to be privately owned and permission from the owner has to be sought. She has also advised that she is not aware of any walls in Brent that have been declassified.

Our Opinion: We appreciated the response, and the straight answer, though it was a disappointing one.
Result: There are no legal walls in Brent. Commissions are allowed.

Borough: Havering
Council’s Response:

To the best of our knowledge the London borough of Havering has no legal walls, but graffers do use the skatepark at Cottons Park which is tolerated by the skaters providing the paint is not used on the surface they are riding on as it makes it very slippery in the wet and becomes dangerous. We have no plans to provide any legal walls unless we were approached through our youth service to consider one. In recent consultations with young people the vast majority said to us they did not like graffiti in their local park. As we develop and improve our parks for the community we would always consult on such issues. Currently our findings are saying the majority would not wish this to happen.

Our Opinion: A fairly straight forward answer, suggesting the potential for a legal wall in the future. It also sounds like painting the skatepark is a pretty safe bet, though we don’t know enough about Havering to know what the plod are like around there.
Result: There are no official legal walls, but Cottons Park is tolerated and seems like a safe bet.

Borough: Hounslow
Their Response:

With regards to your query, this was referred to the Client Manager for Leisure Services within the London Borough of Hounslow. He has sent us the below response:
‘We have no legal walls within our Leisure sites and in line with the councils 10 promises would not promote graffiti within our sites.
So, sorry, we cannot support this idea.’

This is a council decision and as a contractor to the council, we have no decision-making powers in this scenario. Apologies if this is not the outcome you were hoping for.

Our Opinion: Damn right it isn’t the response we were hoping for! At least this council did bother to respond though.
Result: There are no legal walls in Hounslow, and there aren’t likely to be any in the near future.

Borough: Bexley
Council’s Response:

Further to your e-mail, I can confirm that Bexley Council does not have any of the “permission walls” to which you refer.

Our Opinion: That’s all they have to say about that? At least we got a straight answer out of them.
Result: There is nowhere that you can legally paint graffiti in Bexley.

Borough: Kingston
Council’s Response:

There are currently no legal walls where graffiti is permitted in the Royal Borough of Kingston. Several years ago the Council allocated a wall for graffiti in New Malden, this experiment resulted in a significant increase in illegal graffiti across the borough and the wall was ‘removed’. However there are a number of murals in the Borough. These were designed following a competition for local school children. The murals were implemented and are maintained by offenders performing Community Service as part of the Community Payback Scheme.

Our Opinion: An interesting, and seemingly honest response from Kingston council. The part about offenders on community service servicing the walls was particularly interesting!
Result: There are no legal walls on which to paint graffiti in Kingston (any more), unless you are a school child painting a pretty mural with your class!

Borough: Sutton
Council’s Response:

Thank you for your e-mail about “Legal Walls” in The London Borough of Sutton. I am not aware of any sites on council land where this is allowed, although I can only really answer for Parks sites. We have had schemes where graffiti artists have been invited in to create individual pieces of work on skate parks etc. or to work with young people on creating graffiti art projects, but I am not aware of any exemptions from prosecution being allowed for general graffiti artists.

Our Opinion: What is the point in sanctioning individual works, but blocking the art form as a whole? Surely that sends a mixed message?
Result: There are no legal walls in Sutton, but you might be lucky enough to be invited by the council to paint their skateparks.

Borough: Richmond Upon Thames
Council’s Response: No response whatsoever.
Our Opinion: Very disappointing. We at least hoped for a response from Richmond.
Result: Unsure. No one was available to tell us whether or not any spots in Richmond were legal or illegal.

Borough: Harrow
Council’s Response: No response whatsoever.
Our Opinion: This lack of response shows a certain lack of interest in the subject on behalf of the council. If we had been reporting illegal graffiti, would we have gotten a response?
Result: Unsure. There was no reply at all.

Borough: Croydon
Council’s Response: No response whatsoever.
Our Opinion: Another council that didn’t respond to a question posed to them in the correct manner.
Result: Unsure. There was no reply whatsoever.

Borough: Ealing
Council’s Response: No response whatsoever.
Our Opinion: Yet another instance of a council not responding, very disappointing.
Result: Unsure.

Borough: Barnet
Council’s Response:

Thank you for submitting this complaint, comment or feedback . Your report has been successfully received and has been passed onto the appropriate department of the London Borough of Barnet.

Our Opinion: It is all well and good telling us that our question has been forwarded on to the relevant body, but a response from them once in a blue moon would make all the difference!
Result: Unsure. Even the council wouldn’t tell us if and where there are legal spaces to paint.

Borough: Barking And Dagenham
Council’s Response:

Thank you for contacting Barking and Dagenham Direct. I have forwarded your email to the Group Manager Arts & Events; you should expect to receive a response within 10 working days.

Our Opinion: Erm, still waiting. Yet another council who chose not to clarify the rules.
Result: Unsure.

Borough: Haringey
Council’s Response: We received three emails, each telling us the email had been forwarded on by the person it was last forwarded it on to. We are yet to receive any actual response.
Our Opinion: Haringey council have been the worst of all the councils in getting back to us, with automated email after automated email informing us that we were being fibbed off repeatedly. We are yet to receive a response, many months later. Useless.
Result: Unsure. Personal knowledge means we can however confirm that Alexandra Palace is 100% legal.

Final thoughts:

A lot of time and effort went into contacting the relevant people from each council in order to make this post, and that might be why it was so disappointing when councils continually fobbed us off with no-replys and hazy responses. Perhaps it is an anti-graffiti attitude that meant they were less willing to enter into communications with us, or maybe it was as it seemed to us; that the councils themselves were often unsure of what was an officially sanctioned spot and what wasn’t. We had hoped councils would jump at the chance to spread the word to graffiti writers of the legal areas they could practice their art form, but it seemed very few were willing to do this.

Graffiti is a street based, public art form, and it becomes a more popular movement every day. The mainstream media is paying attention to people other than Banksy now, and even councils are using graffiti fonts to market to young people. Graffiti is here to stay, and if councils believe in the value of working to help keep young people on the right side of the law, they owe it to their residents to invest in sanctioned walls. We believe it is nothing more than a fear of being seen as “too liberal” that is stopping more councils from creating provisions for their young people. This forces those young people to commit crimes to pursue their work. Of course people will always paint illegal graffiti (sentencing for which is another topic we hope to get into at some point) whether there are legal walls of not, but some young writers, or writers who have decided to give up the criminal lifestyle would deeply benefit from something as simple as a legal or even “tolerance” wall.

End note: Top marks to Islington council, and all the councils who bothered to respond to our emails. Big red crosses for the rest!

After writing this article, I realised how pro-legal wall it reads. Graffiti would die if it were mostly legal, as is already happening. The point of this exercise was to challenge councils and gain information on the existence (or lack thereof) of legal walls. Your thoughts in the comments please!

BONUS:
Our cousins over the pond have these signs at legal walls that take away responsibility from the City for the personal safety of those using the wall. Could this be a way forward for London’s councils?

The newspaper snob in me finds Banky’s choice of outlet for a rare interview kind of down-market, but I suppose he is just trying to gain further popularity with the type of people who don’t regularly read The Times’ art section of some shit. Regardless of the publication, I did like this quote:

When the paintings suddenly started going for, like, really big money it definitely weirded me out, and I kind of went away to the middle of nowhere and I stopped making any more paintings. But… er… the whole time the auction houses were just selling paintings that I’d done years before and sold for not much money. Or paintings that I traded for a haircut or, yer know, an ounce of weed and they were going for like 50 grand.

At leats he still has a sense of humour! It’s easy to imagine that this interview was put out to promote the DVD which was released yesterday on DVD, as wekk as being leaked to torrent here.

Read the whole interview on The Sun website, here.

You know the name of the game.

Firstly, to Banksy’s lawyers: We aren’t hosting your film, just a file that links to other people who are hosting your film. That is how bittorrent downloads work.

Secondly, to readers who may be fans of Banksy or some shit: Before you say anything about filesharing and paying for the media you consume blah blah, remember that Banksy’s career is based on writing things that don’t belong to him and remixing ideas that went before his own. If he has a problem with us doing this, I’d be surprised. Not that his opinion has anything to do with it!

Finally: If you really love this, perhaps you should buy it. Or perhaps you should buy a graff DVD where the money will go to individuals who aren’t already minted. We don’t know, it’s your money, you decide what to do with it.

Anyway, here is the link to downloadthe Banksy film, Exit Through The Gift Shop. It is a torrent file and you will need to use a bittorrent client for it to work. If you don’t know what bittorrent is, or how it works, get with the times and read about it here.

Enjoy, opinions on the film in the comments!
Thanks to Mr. Cliche for the torrent file.

Clever advertisment is here. It’s surprisingly worth checking out.

Click to see this photo larger, if you dare.

Click here to view the embedded video.