The article's photo of the art barricaded from public view with two security people standing guard in front of it speaks even louder than the original artwork.

And then, further down in the article, the picture of a whole structure built to block the view of the piece, with a locked door. Satire writing itself!

In case it's not clear from the story: a big part of the expense here is that the mural was painted onto the Royal Courts of Justice building, which is a Grade I preserved building, putting it in the same tier of building preservation as the Tower of London and the Palace of Westminster. Some of the things you'd do to get graffiti off a subway tunnel wall or a brutalist municipal building in the US (like using a high-powered pressure washer) can't be done to the RCJ building without risking damage to the structure.

For the comments questioning why the MoJ are doing this, and the reason for the costs, the information can be found in the article:

> A HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) spokesperson said: "The Royal Courts of Justice is a listed building and HMCTS are obliged to maintain its original character."

This is the why. HMCTS don't have the option to "just leave it" because they're obligated by legislation to remove the graffiti. Discussions about whether it'll bring in tourism are irrelevant to the discussion. The law requires the listed building to be maintained in its original state, so the government department follows the law.

As for the costs:

> Court staff barricaded off the area and guarded it. Attempts to clean off the mural began immediately.

> Westminster City Council will have to inspect the wall and if the removal is deemed incomplete, another cleaning method will have to be used.

> As a final option, the affected stonework may have to be removed and replaced.

> A Listed Building Consent (LBC) application has been submitted for the installation of railings across the wall that Banksy targeted.

All of this costs money, it's not just a case of putting a bit of turps on the wall and job done. It'll require experts to remove it without causing further damage.

Technically this is vandalism of a govt building.

If they're so concerned about cost, why not do what you'd do with any other vandal with a spray paint can...

Immediately paint over it with grey paint to neutralize the "blight", then efficiently do a deeper clean / removal / repair the facade.

Seems like they gave the Banksy very special treatment of fence, guards, etc. and now are paying for the side effects of that.

It’s street art/graffiti. If someone wants to tag over it let them. Protecting this stuff with tax payer money is just stupid.

Banksy is an establishment-approved protestor, they promote him regularly [1]. His artwork is regularly on display in galleries [2]. They could easily seize the works to pay for costs, but don't. His name is supposedly Robin Gunningham from Bristol [3], they could take him to court. The whole thing is ridiculous.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cp7r8vglgj1t

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz91zpgn43do

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98q8llqq4po

They could do nothing and just let the art exist for free.

The Banksy cost-benefit and clean-protect loops are part of my favorite modern civic dialogs. I like it when the BBC takes the obvious side of the establishment because it is honest.

Why does it take 85k to remove it from the wall? I'm pretty sure it doesn't cost that much. There is some ridiculous government inefficiency or embezzling happening or some kind of learned helplessness or malicious compliance. Just go, wash it off and done.

And the value of nothing.

why don't they just sell the works to recoup the costs?

how much does graffiti cost the public in general?

> The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) says it has spent £50,000 trying to remove paint from the wall of the Grade II-listed building in Carey Street.

How in the world do you spend £50k to remove a graffiti?

It costs only 150k? Pay the man. Its public art. Its art, and a damn sight better than the advertisements, wait... are you comparing art to ads? Get the ads to pay for the art? This article is merely government propiganda. Oh Charles... wake up! Knight Banksy noe..

A rounding error to support the arts.

Now do how much tourist money his works have brought in.

Well, prosecute him for vandalism then to recoup the costs?

"Think of the money!" This mentality needs to go extinct. Along with billionaires.

And well worth it. Too bad they defaced it.

Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy said: ""Our courts are a national symbol of justice and the rule of law."

It seems like someone doesn't get the symbolism of the Banksy piece.

Original art by Banksy is reportedly valued at millions of £ or $ [0]

The BBC says "Banksy works cost public almost £150k" because "The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) says it has spent £50,000 trying to remove paint from the wall of the Grade II-listed building in Carey Street."

Therefore, the title is incorrect. The cost to the public is much more than £150k. The Ministry's damage to this freely-contributed artwork has probably already cost the public a few million £, not just £150k

[0] https://www.dawsonsauctions.co.uk/news-item/how-much-is-an-o...