This weird attempt to try and smear Banksy only highlights that the MoJ spent an absolute fortune washing a bit of paint off a wall from an artist much loved by most people.

[duncanbourne@c.im]

@TheBreadmonkey I was rather confused by the headline. Surely Banksy's work cost the taxpayers nothing. REMOVING Banksy's work cost 150k. Surely the story is... Removing it wasn't worth it?

[bashstkid@mastodon.online]

@TheBreadmonkey Tiny in comparison with the money wasted by the MoJ trying to fight Palestine Action.
Shouldn’t the BBC be mentioning that for the balance they’re so keen on?

[bencurthoys@mastodon.social]

@TheBreadmonkey spending £150,000 on failing to clean some paint off a wall is not the flex they evidently think it is. Rather, it's prima facie evidence of gross incompetence and everyone involved should be fired.

[geofcox@climatejustice.social]

@duncanbourne

I rather think the point of the misleading headline was to, well... mislead !

@TheBreadmonkey

[akki@toot.lgbt]

@TheBreadmonkey Every day the BBC proves it's ready for its position in the future fascist regime 🫠

[bazkie@beige.party]

@TheBreadmonkey I remember a time when the BBC was a respected media institution

[erebus_amauro@ohai.social]

@TheBreadmonkey "Being a bunch of dicks with Banksy's paintings costs the taxpayers £150.000"

[englram@troet.cafe]

@TheBreadmonkey
Meanwhile, people in #Turku #Finnland ( #Suomi ) pay an entrance fee to see his art:

https://www.mystery-banksy.fi/en/

Paying a fortune to remove a probably valuable piece of art seems to be part of what the artist intended to demonstrate - unappropriate application of power.

[fourt4@mastodonapp.uk]

@bencurthoys @TheBreadmonkey can someone tell them I'd have a go for £140,000.

[torf@c.im]

@TheBreadmonkey "is likely to reignite debate over whether Banksy's work is vandalism or valuable public art"
I believe the only question that should be reignited in such case is efficiency of spending the taxpayers money.

[cyberquixote@infosec.exchange]

@TheBreadmonkey they’re butthurt and they should be because an artist is doing a better job pointing out their shortcomings than they are

[icooiey@mastodon.green]

@TheBreadmonkey Now show the amount of £ generated by tourism to see Banksy art?

[luc0x61@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@TheBreadmonkey Taxpayers are really lucky, that such a ridicule expense brings in return so fine and timely art pieces.

[akamran@indieweb.social]

@TheBreadmonkey @trending they could have CHARGED ADMISSION TO SEE IT ffs (sorry for yelling)

[quietewe@urbanists.social]

@TheBreadmonkey On a street art tour in London, we passed a Banksy piece that the city had covered with plexiglass to preserve it…because they know Banksy’s work draws valuable tourism. I wonder what’s so different about piranhas on a police box or a magister beating a protester on a court wall I just can’t figure it out

(Also, they’re including £60k for *protecting* a different piece in that £150k?? Why does a statue need a security guard?)

[dtm@mastodon.cc]

@TheBreadmonkey @eco_amandine

Read the room just a little better. We like Banksy and don’t have any faith in the MoJ.

[nickiquote@mstdn.social]

@TheBreadmonkey My Aunt Dolly woulda done it for nuffink.

[jaypeach53@calckeymusic.social]

@Akki@toot.lgbt @TheBreadmonkey@beige.party IDK, the current British government sure seems fascist to me as an American dissident.

[houba@spore.social]

@TheBreadmonkey

If an organisation spends £85k to remove approx 2msq of paint from a stone building, people should be asking serious questions of their competence.

If that organisation is the MoJ, people should also ask if the organisation understands the intent of habeas corpus.

[bluebrogues@social.vivaldi.net]

@dtm @TheBreadmonkey @eco_amandine Ministry of Injustice . Fuckin terrorist Granny's . They will be the death o the Injustice department