The history of the criminalisation of Gardening is quite interesting.

Initially it was action taken by the colonial government to control and marginalise the native population who had an entirely agricultural society.

This allowed the government to confiscate land from the native population, alongside dismantling the structure of their society by imprisoning Chiefs who were responsible for the actions of their tribe. This also limited trade with settlers who would refuse to barter with illegal produce which was the only item of value the indigenous population could produce.

With gardens only being legal if owned and operated by the state, this developed a healthy black market for fresh produce. Criminal gangs quickly established a strong trade in produce and operated many illicit gardens across the country.

This only entrenched the governments anti-gardening policy.

The narrative has since changed. The government now sells storeys of the dangers and hazards of gardening along with the risks of consuming fruit and veg produced outside the heavily regulated gardens of the State.

These are partially true, as demonstrated by yesterday's incident, and there are risks with eating unsafe or home-grown vegetables. however the simple fact is its illegal because the gangs earn most of their profit through the produce trade.

As far as enforcement from my position goes, we try to turn a blind eye to an odd cherry tomato plant, or a basil plant. However once we start finding cultivation with obvious intent to supply (a couple of "rows" for example) or some serious vegetables like carrots or potatoes, then we have to take some action.

The academic study on this issue is quite contentious with strong arguments in favour of both sides.