AFTER the hearing, Tim Horrox said: “This has been a bizarre experience for me.
“I am the owner of a number of media and marketing companies, including an advertising agency called Diabolical Liberties. This company acts for many arts and cultural industry clients.
“In the past the agency has even co-ordinated fly-posting work on behalf of Camden’s Arts and Leisure Department, which has promoted music festivals in the borough. The agency has never disputed that one of the services it has provided has been to distribute advertisement posters to groups within the borough who then erect the posters by means of ‘fly-posting’.
“Attitudes towards ‘fly-posting’ have changed over the years. As a professional advertising man I have always been aware of the limitations of the medium and the balance that needs to be struck between the need for low-cost advertising, in particular for local venues and emerging artists, and the need to maintain tidy public spaces.
“For about 10 years now I have been involved in the establishment of authorised poster schemes in various towns and cities throughout the country.
“Before this trial commenced, I offered a public undertaking not to instruct persons to erect advertising posters in Camden.
“During the course of the Camden Asbo case my company has been approached by several councils elsewhere in the UK to discuss setting up such schemes and good progress has been made. There are several models which I believe would still provide a lasting solution within our borough.
“Now that this case is over, the council no longer has any excuse not to engage with residents and businesses on this issue and finally undertake a proper consultation exercise balancing everyone’s needs and interests.
“ This case has demonstrated the limitations of the enforcement solution. It is now time for a long overdue debate in Camden, one that elsewhere in Britain has brought permanent community benefits. I will continue to abide by the terms of my public undertakings.”