by CAA | Sep 5, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues
It has been reported that the morale of the Police is at an all-time low. Contact with serving members by the CAA confirms the low morale issue; however, if the morale issue is to be addressed, it will not be solved by pay increases; that is not a silver morale bullet; the problem will still exist.
To understand the issues at play better, the Hawthorne Experiment sets out the issues well.
“The studies concluded that tangible motivators such as monetary incentives and good working conditions are generally less important in improving employee productivity than intangible motivators such as meeting individuals’ desire to belong to a group and be included in decision making and work.”
https://www.google.com/search?q=Thw+Hawthorn+experiment&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU710AU711&oq=Thw+
Although we strongly support the need to increase Police salaries, the underlying causes of low morale must be urgently addressed.
Whether a four-day week or an extra 15 minutes per shift, any move to decrease productivity has a knock-on effect, reducing staff availability and aggravating morale by increasing the load on on-duty members.
Looking from outside the force, the central issue seems to be not how many Police are in the organisation but how they are used and, importantly, how often good work is acknowledged.
It is evident that a significant shift in the current approach to policing is needed.
Around 2010, the force transitioned from a proactive force engaging with the community to a predominantly reactionary force, using arrests as a measure of success.
This shift in approach has clearly not served Victoria well. It has contributed, among other factors, to the increase in crime, particularly among juveniles.
Over fourteen years, which included in 2016, prophetic warnings from the CAA of a crime tsunami, particularly a youth crime tsunami, successive administrations have ignored or have been incapable of heeding our advice.
It is no wonder that morale is low with front-line staff so stretched as to make a very rewarding job into a drudgery with job satisfaction, a major job morale issue, almost eliminated.
No matter what the excuses, the reality is the problem must be shared amongst the force executive for poor leadership, and they should face the brunt of criticism.
The CAA believes that although a lot more can be done to address the issue, the current Chief Commissioner, Shane Patton, has at least tried to address some of the anomalies in management strategies and applications. However, it does appear that he is facing headwinds from a number of senior officers who have perhaps a Neanderthal inclination to Policing; a clean-out is absolutely overdue.
The morale problem must be adequately exposed so it can be addressed; to do that, an examination of the issues must be undertaken. Whether internal or external, it has little consequence as long as the process is totally transparent and capable of taking sworn evidence.
Some of the issues that must be examined are’.
- Force discipline – Policing is or should be a disciplined force given its dangerous function. Supervisors in the field and elsewhere must be respected and trained and, collectively, insist on discipline from their subordinates; being their best friend doesn’t cut it when a situation turns to muck. There are no problems with being friends off duty, but that relationship must change once on duty.
- Allocation of resources – There is something dramatically wrong with the management function when some Police stations can have high numbers of Police beavering away on computers. In contrast, neighbouring communities have no police to keep their local station open.
- Situational awareness – as often seen in the media, apart from police engaged in an incident, there always appear to be many police acting as onlookers. While it is not wrong to have the backs of the police directly involved, nobody has the backs of all the police audience to the action. This is dangerous and exposes the Police to unreasonable danger. The lack of supervision or poorly trained supervisors at incidents is a major failure.
- Organisational review/audit – there does not appear to be an effective review and audit process for the operations and management of resources within VicPol. This is a grave anomaly, and problems cannot be routinely identified and addressed, feeding into the declining morale problem.
Other issues need addressing; however, the most important is the Review as the most efficient path to not only lifting morale but also supporting the Chief Commissioner and bringing Victoria Police up to best practice standard of a modern police force.
by CAA | Sep 3, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library, Victoria Police Issues
BREAK THE NEEDLE 4 – CAA Comment
Another insightful article from Break the Needle in Canada. It is becoming uncanny as these articles relate to the identical issues and fallout from drug use and abuse in this state.
We can easily transpose Nelson for Richmond as the issues are not similar but identical.
They have both gone down the path of harm minimisation and are paying a very high community social price.
The power of these articles is they allow the obverse argument to be published, giving a balanced account of the situation, and allowing readers to form their own views, something the pro-drug lobby will not tolerate.
The tired old chestnut of “Drug addiction is a health issue, not a crime” was again trotted out, and its use is disingenuous.
Addiction per se is a health issue, and on that, there is no argument, but the behaviour of the addicts while under the influence is more often than not criminal, as is the sourcing of their drugs of choice. As are the behaviours that the addicts and all users indulge in facilitating their access to illegal products.
The problem with the Health argument is that it implies that all the other criminal and anti-social behaviours of users and addicts are somehow acceptable or excusable, arrant rubbish.
By Alexandra Keeler
“Just the other night, we had an intruder in our yard,” Kirsten Stolee recounted, her voice unsteady. Her two daughters often watch television with their windows open. “He easily could have gotten inside,” she said.
Stolee lives in Nelson, a picturesque, mountain-rimmed town in BC’s Southern Interior that is struggling with rising public disorder. Some residents, herself included, say that local harm reduction initiatives – which appear to be operating without adequate accountability and safety measures – are responsible for the decay.
Near Stolee’s house, one can find the Stepping Stones emergency shelter alongside the former Nelson Friendship Outreach Clubhouse, which used to provide support services for individuals struggling with mental health issues before being abandoned late last year.
When the clubhouse still operated, supporters claimed that it provided clients with a space to socialize and partake in “art, gardening, cooking and summer camp” – but critics countered that it was a drop-in centre for drug users. After the provincial government announced plans to open a supervised inhalation site at the clubhouse early last year, local residents protested and had the project, and eventually the clubhouse itself, shut down.
Although Stolee supports harm reduction in principle, she opposed the opening of the inhalation site on safety grounds. The incidents near her home were concerning: an assault just outside her window, a drug-addled individual stabbing a pole with scissors, people carrying weapons on the street in front of the site. When her daughter’s phone was stolen, it was eventually recovered from a man at the clubhouse.
Although the clubhouse is closed, Stepping Stones continues to operate and has been similarly chaotic. Stolee watched a suspected drug dealer attack one of the residents there, and learned that another resident had made an inappropriate comment to her daughter.
She has also observed fire hazards near local homeless encampments, including a burning electrical panel and abandoned fires, and says that local drug users “play with fires” on sidewalks and streets. She finds these incidents concerning, as BC and Alberta have recently been ravaged by large wildfires and Nelson’s downtown is filled with historic wooden architecture.
Calling the police seemed unhelpful. In one case, officers dismissed her concerns about a man who was carrying large rocks, considering him non-threatening. However, the man was later arrested for assault and for using these types of rocks to break into a gas station.
Gavin Halford, a representative of Interior Health, the provincial agency which oversees most of the region’s harm reduction programs, stated that his organization “does not tolerate or condone any form of criminal activity, including trespassing.” He claimed that Interior Health has taken “a number of steps to increase security at the Clubhouse,” including increased signage, lighting, video surveillance and on-site security services.
However, the acquisition of 24/7 security services was facilitated by Stolee’s partner, after Interior Health told him that no such options were available. The partner also alleges that he was told by local police officers that Interior Health asked them not to enforce the “No Trespassing” signs around the clubhouse.
Stolee’s family has since invested $1,000 into security upgrades such as video surveillance and fencing. “We have baseball bats and pepper spray by our front door and a bat under the bed,” she said, noting that she wrote a letter to BC Premier David Eby detailing their experiences, which received no reply.
Kari Kroker, another neighbour of Stepping Stones, said that downtown Nelson has experienced a noticeable decline as open drug use and trafficking have proliferated, including sales to youth. “The alley behind my house has become a place of screaming and chaos,” she said, expressing frustration at how some drug users have told local children that using drugs is a form of “play.”
“I’m all in favour of putting more money into this situation, but I think we’re going the cheap way,” said Kroker. “I don’t see the province doing much to solve this. I don’t see rehab and supports for people. We need rehab. Where are the facilities to support people?” She believes that the town’s social fabric is fraying and that “harmony has been completely undermined.”
Tanya Finley, owner of Finley’s Bar and Grill and Sage Wine Bar, is an outspoken critic of provincial harm reduction policies and a leading figure in N2, the local residents’ association. She says that human feces, drug dealing, broken windows and home invasions are daily issues in her community: “Our eighty-year-old neighbour, who had just had surgery, had a brick thrown through her window.”
Finley says that her activism has had personal and professional costs and that, after she wrote a newspaper article advocating that homeless individuals be relocated to more suitable locations, a harm reduction advocate urged for a boycott of her business on social media. This led to a decline in sales and caused some of her employees to worry about their job security.
N2 was formed earlier this year after the province attempted to open the aforementioned supervised inhalation site. Local residents believed that the location of the site was unsuitably close to several youth facilities and that health authorities had, in contravention to Health Canada guidelines, failed to adequately consult the community.
“We were lied to deliberately and continuously,” said Kroker. “We found out later that this had been in the works for almost a year.”
Early efforts to address public safety concerns were undermined by accusations of NIMBYism and inadequate responses from government authorities. After N2 was formed and took collective action – such as letters to officials and media engagement – officials began to take these concerns more seriously and temporarily halted the opening of the inhalation site.
Polly Sutherland from ANKORS, a local harm reduction organization, acknowledged friction with the community but said that deteriorating public safety is largely due to limited resources. “We need more staff hours… We have the expertise and compassion for these individuals. Just give us the resources to do our jobs, and we will get it done,” she said.
She said that high rents have worsened homelessness and dereliction, and that mobile services could mitigate the concentration of public disorder in certain areas.
Nelson’s Mayor, Janice Morrison, who has had 35 years of experience working in healthcare, emphasized that municipal authority over healthcare is limited and argued for improved communication with provincial and federal agencies, which she believed needed to provide more funding.
“I think ANKORS is totally correct in that they need more staff hours and more resources,” she said, while stressing the importance of funding existing roles, such as community safety officers and outreach workers. “Drug addiction is a health issue, not a crime,” she said.
Morrison also criticized Interior Health for its inadequate community consultation regarding the placement of harm reduction sites. “They’ve had a hard go of it in their area,” the mayor said, referring to these sites’ neighbours.
Despite public safety challenges, Morrison noted that Nelson has made progress with operating several safe injection sites and would soon be adding 28 supportive housing beds. She remained committed to finding solutions despite persistent funding difficulties. “I’m ready to hear the solutions, and to support anyone with viable ideas,” she said.
by CAA | Aug 24, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library, Safe Injecting Rooms, Victoria Police Issues
CAA
The CAA has long promoted a similar scenario for this state, arguing that kicking those suffering substance abuse or any impairment that removes their acuity to manage themselves into the gutter and walk away is effectively what we are doing in this State and is a disgusting treatment and disrespect for human life.
The drug apologists try to falsely claim the moral high ground, claiming that Harm Minimisation saves lives. How does facilitating the pumping of some questionable drug into an addict’s veins help the addict? It may be okay for them today, but what about tomorrow?
We aggravate the situation by creating an alleged safe injecting room that does nothing to address the issues of the user. How perpetuating the adverse effect that drugs have on people by providing government support in the furtherance of their addiction or risk-taking is incomprehensible.
We can learn a lot from Ontario; they have been there and are now plotting a way back.
Ontario’s decision to close safe consumption sites near schools and daycares comes in the wake of a bystander’s death and class-action lawsuit.
By Alexandra Keeler
In a dramatic shift in policy, Ontario is closing 10 safe consumption sites located near schools and daycares, citing public safety concerns.
“Our first priority must always be protecting our communities, especially when it comes to our most innocent and vulnerable — our children,” said Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones at an Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference in Ottawa on Tuesday.
Safe consumption sites, which enable people to use illicit drugs with sterile equipment under staff supervision, will be prohibited from operating within 200 metres of schools and child-care centres after March 31, 2025.
The province also plans to introduce legislation to prevent municipalities from establishing new consumption sites, requesting the decriminalization of illegal drugs or participating in federal safe supply initiatives, a health ministry press release says.
Safe consumption sites have faced mounting scrutiny in the wake of community feedback highlighting their effect on public safety.
“We’ve noticed a real change from 2021 onwards,” Andrea Nickel, a parent who lives near a safe consumption site at Toronto’s South Riverdale Community Health Centre, told Canadian Affairs in May.
“At the beginning of last year it just escalated out of control.”
Unacceptable danger
Ontario opened its first safe consumption site in 2017 with the aim of reducing overdose deaths and providing users with a gateway to treatment. Today, there are 23 safe consumption sites across the province, 17 of which are provincially funded.
KeepSIX, the safe consumption site in South Riverdale, is among the sites facing closure. Last July, Karolina Huebner-Makurat, a local resident and mother of two, was fatally shot during a gunfight outside the site. Her death prompted Ontario to conduct two reviews of the centre and to also review the 16 other provincially funded sites.
A review of keepSIX conducted by the hospital network Unity Health Toronto and released in February recommended improvements in security, community relations, law enforcement communication and staff training. It did not recommend closure.
Drugs found by a child in the South Riverdale neighbourhood. (Photo provided by Andrea Nickel.)
The second review, released in April and conducted by former health-care executive Jill Campbell, also opposed closure. It advocated instead for expanded harm reduction and treatment, enhanced security and increased mental health support.
In March 2024, two South Riverdale residents launched a class-action lawsuit against the operator of keepSIX and all levels of government, Canadian Affairs reported in May. The lawsuit alleges the site has exposed the community to unacceptable danger.
The site’s proximity to daycares and schools and its role in exposing children to illicit drugs and used needles are at the heart of that case.
Reacting to this week’s announcement, South Riverdale parent Andrea Nickel said she is supportive of the site’s services. “[But] it is not unreasonable to ask that they are balanced with community safety, specifically kids’ safety.”
South Riverdale’s response cited the centre’s role in reversing 74 overdoses in 2023.
“Every overdose reversed is a life saved,” Anne Marie Aikins, a public affairs consultant at AMA Communications, said on behalf of the centre.
Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.
‘Devil’s in the details’
In Tuesday’s address, Ontario’s health minister also announced a $378-million investment to establish 19 new Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment Hubs (HART hubs) across the province. These recovery-focused hubs will offer social support services and employment assistance to individuals struggling with addiction.
They will not provide supervised drug consumption, needle exchange programs or the “safe supply” of prescribed controlled substances.
“The devil’s in the details with these things,” said John-Paul Michael, an addictions case manager in Toronto who has extensive experience in harm reduction and lived experience with substance use.
“Everyone I know in the harm-reduction community is very much in favour of having better access to treatment, better access to detox, better wraparound care,” he said. “The problem becomes when it is at the expense of other evidence-based care.”
Michael says safe consumption sites are often the only form of health care available to individuals struggling with addiction. Eliminating them would leave these individuals without support, he says.
“Safe consumption sites are essential for saving lives, particularly for those who may never seek formal treatment,” he said. “Eliminating these supports disregards the value of human life.”
Michael is also concerned about the reduction of needle exchange services, which are crucial for managing HIV and Hepatitis C rates and lessening the burden on emergency rooms.
“Community-based nurses at [safe consumption sites] provide basic care that can prevent emergency department visits and potentially severe outcomes, such as [intensive care unit] stays,” Michael said.
The province will soon seek proposals to establish up to 10 HART hubs. Priority will be given to proposals that aim to transition existing safe consumption sites — especially those facing closure — into HART hubs.
“[T]he likelihood is that [these transitions] would happen very quickly,” Health Minister Jones told reporters on Tuesday. “The other applications — it will depend on what they bring forward.”
Linda B.
I’m not sure when the “ helping community” is going to get it through their heads that helping people stay addicted is not helping them. When addicts have their substance of choice freely available and someone to make sure they don’t die, what possible reason would they have for doing the hard work of getting clean? Users are interested in one thing above health, family, even food: the next dose.
by CAA | Aug 20, 2024 | Features, Library
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) mourns the loss of their friend and colleague on 20/08/2024, Dr Raymond Shuey AM APM, PhD, R.R.S.P., B.A (Police Studies), Dip. Crim., Dip. Govt. Investigations, FAIM, FIPAAV.
Ray, a Vietnam war veteran, succumbed to his long battle with ill health while contributing to the CAA to the very end.
A former Victorian police officer and Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Operations, Ray’s contribution to his Country and State was one of selfless devotion.
Following his retirement from the Victoria Police in 2003, Ray conducted reviews for VicRoads and the Victoria Police, as well as co-ordinating the police response to the Bushfires Royal Commission. Ray regularly consulted on road safety and police operational safety in Australia and worldwide.
Head of Strategic Safety Solutions, despite ill health, Ray was also President of the International Safety Foundation, which facilitates the international transfer of road safety and medical equipment to save lives in lower-income countries.
An inaugural member of the CAA, Ray worked tirelessly to lead our teams in the areas of road safety and domestic violence. His amazing contribution to our efforts to achieve improvements in the way these problems are dealt with by police and government are acknowledged with sincere thanks.
Rest in peace, friend and colleague. All members of the CAA are proud to have known and worked with you.
To Ray’s family and friends, the CAA offers our sincere condolences. Your loss is our loss.
by CAA | Aug 20, 2024 | Library, Uncategorized
Our State is dying on its feet. We have record debt levels, our Health System is in tatters, Education standards are rapidly declining, Victoria Police are understaffed, our roads are so potholed they are unsafe to drive on and crime, particularly juvenile crime, is totally out of control.
Why?
How can this Happen?
The answer is simple. Knock on (almost) any door. The vast majority of electors don’t really care enough to express their disgust. Apathy reigns.
There is the old joke of a person wanting to start an anti-apathy committee but couldn’t get anyone interested.
For the past nine and a half years, the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) website (caainc.org.au) has contained dozens of articles that we have published repeatedly, drawing attention to some of these problems.
We have gained a degree of traction with the general media as a community voice of reason. While this is appreciated, the CAA operates on a shoestring budget, and we have no paid staff. Our members are actually levied to provide operational funds.
Time to give apathy the boot. Time for our readers to get involved.
Join our organization or consider a donation.
We need YOUR support.
With that we could do so much more to encourage the government to lift their game.
Visit https://caainc.org.au/donate/
by CAA | Aug 12, 2024 | Library, Uncategorized
Pic. courtesy Herald Sun
Victorians have every right to express concern about the current crime trends as community safety is rapidly veering towards the biggest problem facing this State, and the community mouthpiece, the media, is generally silent.
Rampant crime adversely impacts so much of our lives, not only at a personal level but in a macro sense, affecting the ability to deliver Health Services, creating budget pressure, curtailing positive Education outcomes for our children as perpetrators and victims, adding millions to the delivery of infrastructure, and most significantly, destroying many families, the cornerstone of our society.
Understandably, much of the adverse focus is on the Police; after all, the CAA and the media generally are the first to call out issues where Policing is failing, and that is a legitimate and healthy role that should not be discouraged. However, that police ‘carry the can’, so to speak, for the crime tsunami is very unfair.
In particular, the media gives the Courts a free run, generally avoiding any criticism, which is a mistake that does not serve the community well.
Until the courts accept and act on their responsibility, irrespective of how efficient or proficient police are in bringing perpetrators before the courts, crime rates will continue to soar. Paradoxically, the inaction and lack of support in a global sense for policing by the courts contribute significantly to the crime rate as perpetrators lose the important deterrent factor the courts are supposed to perform. Police end up chasing their tails.
We acknowledge that legislators also bear responsibility, but even with weakening laws, there are many ways that the judiciary could improve. One of those is through a system of robust accountability.
The current accountability is based on vague notions that fly in the face of sound jurisprudence.
Two core legal principles are crushed by the current lack of effectiveness of our legal system by the courts.
- Justice delayed is justice denied—a 19th-century proverb.
The lengthy delays in bringing perpetrators before the courts are either due to poor administration of the Court systems or inept behaviour by Jurists. Either way, before the inevitable blame is placed on budget restraints, the path to efficiency must be empirically demonstrated.
- It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffers.- Blackstone’s Ratio.
We read daily of inordinately long delays in delivering justice, sometimes years, translating into more crime or unjust treatment of accused persons.
Jurists’ propensity to repeatedly bail accused persons has a severely detrimental effect on justice delivery. Perpetrators from all court jurisdictions are let back into the community for extended periods under court-imposed conditions, which are rarely adhered to, to commit further crimes while awaiting trial. The net effect for most accused is that they are caught one day back on the streets the next.
- The accused languishes in jail on remand.
That is unjust, even for a serious crime, as the accused is innocent until proven guilty. However, jurists send accused persons to jail without a trial and without conviction for extended unacceptable periods. That the accused does time and is then not convicted is cold comfort for the prisoner and amounts to a cruel and unjust punishment.
Innocent Victims who have lived through crime trauma are further punished by inordinate delays often contributed to by the Legal fraternity as a tactic to maximise the benefit to their accused client, weakening the victim and witnesses’ resolve. How we can stand by and apply the punishment the legal process applies to victims is unconscionable.
An ineffective Judicial system is responsible for, in large part, the rise in crime.
Crime impinges on every aspect of our lives, so there is now more than ever an urgent need to expose Judicial failures and demand that an independent Judicial Review mechanism be established to address the issue that currently exists, whether that be the performance of the judicial system overall or the performance of individual Jurists.
The Judicial Review Authority must not be allowed to become a ‘lawyers’ picnic’ and have lay people in the panel representing the community with higher representation than the legal fraternity, which is clearly out of touch with the community. This Authority must also be accountable, which is best served by being appointed and answerable to a Parliamentary bipartisan oversight committee.
The media reports on many legal matters, and it seems that questions should be asked about the behaviour of some jurists but are not.
The legal system, as it stands, allows misconduct to go unchecked, and that is as bad for the credibility of the Courts as it is for the competent and reliable Jurists who serve the community well.
There are several examples,
- One case we are aware of involves a defendant charged with serious violent crimes who has allegedly manipulated the legal system to extend his bail for five (5) years to avoid being held to account despite appearing for thirteen (13) Bail hearings.
What is significant is that the thirteen appearances were before thirteen different Magistrates, strongly suggesting a breakdown in Court administration or Magistrates being manipulated by the defendant’s Legal counsel.
The Lawyer representing the defendant in this matter is an Officer of the Court, so any indiscretions by a lawyer in a matter before the Court are the ultimate responsibility of the Court. By due process, the judge sitting as a court in any jurisdiction is therefore accountable; hence, there is a need for a judicial review authority to ensure the judge’s accountability in this situation.
The victims, a mother and her children, are in hiding, destitute and unable to move on but continue to hide in fear. The impact on these victims taking a terrible toll on their lives and their future, an unconscionable outcome.
It is inexcusable that the Courts allow this to occur.
- The infamous Gobbo affair is an outstanding example where criminality within the legal system was exposed. The findings of the High Court of Australia were unambiguous in its condemnation of the players in this matter. Still, nobody has been held to account for all the dozen or so key players and the many more-bit players. The question is, why were these players not put before the Courts? Is there corruption at the highest levels? What consequences exist for this transgression?
- The Covid-19 pandemic exposed many failings, but the most significant was the failure to hold people to account for the over Eight Hundred people who it is alleged died as a direct result of incompetence. The opportunity existed on at least two occasions for the courts to take action. The Coronial inquiries into the deaths should have exposed the issues, as should the much-maligned and malevolent ‘I can’t remember’ Coate judicial inquiry.
- Currently, the aftermath of the motor car collision between the ex-Premier Daniel Andrews’s car and a young boy makes its way through the civil courts, raising the issue of why the matter was not processed initially through the criminal system. The whole event has a whiff of criminality, not only the crash itself but the actions of a law firm and others after the crash.
Article 26 of the Australian Human Rights Commission sets out unambiguously the rights of Australians before the law, but unfortunately, the courts trample on those rights in the examples given
A Judicial review Authority must have the power to intervene when the Judicial system appears to be in trouble or fails.
To avoid serious misconduct and matters being blocked or diverted from the courts, the Judicial Review Authority must have the power to initiate inquiries with powers similar to those of the Royal Commission. This would allow the community to be confident in the court process.
The process must allow the light in. to sanitise the process, and the community mouthpiece, the media, has a crucial role in facilitating this outcome.
by CAA | Aug 9, 2024 | Library, Uncategorized
Pic. courtesy Herald Sun
The Herald Sun headline on the 9th of August ‘24 gives hope that Victoria Police are entering a new phase where clever resource use reaps outstanding results, but more can still be done.
We don’t know whether this means that the media have more access to police-community operations and are privy to what’s happening. Still, either way, it is a positive change and will boost the community’s confidence in the Police.
The current operations in the City of Port Philip demonstrate what can be done when Police management applies itself.
The real test, however, will be when the major Operation ends.
This Police Operation, with multiple arrests, will wrest the streets back from criminals, making the area safer for a time determined by the Courts, not the police.
With current court experience, most, if not all, offenders will be back on the street within hours.
The Police can’t do much about that but what planning is underway to ensure the regular policing response maintains the edge that the major operation archives? Or will it revert to business as usual until the community again raises concerns about a lack of police action in their locality? We hope not.
It was reported that the Commander of this operation said,
“ Remanding offenders in custody for low-level drug offending would only choke the courts further.
“We don’t want to tie up the courts; we don’t want to tie up the criminal justice system with what needs to be a health-led response,” he added. – HS 9th August ‘24
This raises two critical points.
- Police are not responsible for Court management or the Justice system; they need to remain focused on the police function and not be influenced by the inefficiencies of another Government function. The Courts are renowned for being super inefficient, which is a matter for the Courts, not the police. Police have enough to do.
In many ways, the Courts’ overload may be a positive, pushing them to take a greater responsibility in reducing recidivism among perpetrators. Much of this recidivism is hidden by so-called ‘Diversions’, which obscure the effectiveness or otherwise of the Courts.
Shut the Justice revolving door.
- Secondly, the issue of a health-led response. This much-bandied concept has been hijacked by the pro-drug activists pushing the incorrectly interpreted strategy of ‘Harm Minimisation’, which has been manipulated into ‘Harm Facilitation’.
The dug injecting room, free supply of drug injecting equipment (instead of the needle exchange program)and Pill testing are classic examples where the government has given up on proactive discouragement of illicit drug use, moving to actively promoting drugs by facilitating their use and abuse.
The issue we have with a health-based response to date is the past experiences, particularly Covid and Harm Minimisation.
We are not comfortable with the government directly collaborating or even conspiring in the illicit drug process, an illegal activity, giving drug use credibility it should not have.
We do, however, strongly support a health-based approach. Essentially, that would involve the Police having the power of a Health Officer to issue a Health Notice to anybody whose cognitive skills are compromised and who has recently consumed drugs, illicit or otherwise, that can adversely affect their cognitive ability or are likely to compromise their health.
These people can then be transported to a secure facility, where the Health Department manages the suspect’s health and avoids clogging Hospital ERs and tying up Ambulances. Contracted transport can move the drug-affected people around as they do with Drunks.
The facility must be secure so that when the person is detained, they can be released back to the police when their health is stabilised to finalise any pending criminal matters or the police have nothing else pending they can be discharged without further action provided the Health professionals sign off that it will be safe for the person to be discharged.
We must, however, remain eternally vigilant as efforts to de-power police in recent history have accelerated at a pace never before experienced in this State.
Police have lost the power to manage social disorder by various Summary Offences being repealed, the power to arrest and charge young thugs, even some committing unspeakably cruel crimes, has been severely curtailed, and the Force actions have been further curtailed by imposition of functions to tie up Police resources gathering data for other government agencies.
The next target for the ideological zealots will no doubt be the common law power for police to use discretion.
There are already signs of inroads being made to curtail this power, evident in the legislative provision regarding Police caution in the new Youth Justice Bill currently before the Parliament.
It is a program that has served the community very well for many decades, ensuring young people are diverted, not from the justice system as the Bill intends, but from a life of crime, a much more effective and desirable outcome.
Over the decades, many, many thousands of young people whose only brush with the law resulted in a Police caution for some indiscretion have since developed into very worthwhile members of society, which may well include some of our community leaders.
Removing Police discretion will be a significant win for the ideologues, and it must be resisted with vigour.
The days of the Courts simply processing those charged and issuing a penalty appropriate to the conviction are past. Society now looks to the Courts to take an active role in crime prevention beyond their traditional role.
When crime statistics are released, the police are inevitably judged by them as a measure of their performance; this must also be extended to the Courts and individual jurists as Key Performance Indicators (KPI).
by CAA | Aug 8, 2024 | Library, Uncategorized
“Four teenage girls and a 12-year-old boy have been arrested and a number of machetes seized after allegedly leading police on a chase across Melbourne’s eastern suburbs in a stolen car” – Herald Sun on the 8th of August 2024.
This report is a far too common theme, young children committing very serious crimes, and the headline response from the government is to raise the age of criminal responsibility from ten to thirteen in the new Youth Justice Bill currently before parliament. What an inane response.
Unbelievable as it may seem, the new Act also removes any accountability for young offenders and gives them control of their processing.
The Bill imbues the child perpetrator with the power to reject any efforts to manage their behaviour by authorities.
This provides a blatant windfall for Lawyers representing the young, guiding them to exercise their newfound extended rights.
They are old enough to make decisions about their management but too young to understand that they are committing a crime, really?
There is a distinct possibility that these changes, opening the door for lawyer involvement, will not benefit the child but have the opposite effect.
Given these changes, not only will young people be disadvantaged, but the community will have no idea what number of children under thirteen and eventually under fourteen are committing acts that would otherwise be crimes.
Perhaps fortunate for these particular young offenders, the Youth Justice Act will not influence the process that can currently be implemented. Therefore, there is hope that these children will be redirected from a life of crime.
But let us presume, for the sake of debate, that the Youth Justice Act is operational relative to this incident.
In particular, the circumstance of the twelve-year-old.
Under the new Bill, the Police can take the child to a Police station or their home.
They cannot be interviewed or subject the child to any other of the traditional processes designed to reduce crime, such as photographing, fingerprinting, or interviewing.
And who will know, much less have any ability to intervene, if the twelve-year-old is the principal offender leading the girls into crime?
This Bill, however, allows a child to conclude that their behaviour is acceptable.
Steal a car and evade police, having armed themselves for a yet-to-be-determined purpose, and for the twelve-year-old and possibly others, there are no consequences.
They do not have to take responsibility for their actions or intent, and they can reject any attempts by authorities to divert them.
Good police work averted a far more serious crime where obviously the weapons were to be used.
What sort of society are we creating? Not a good or safe one.
The most serious omission of due process is the interview, which, amongst other things, may determine the social dynamic that caused such a young child to end up in a stolen car armed to the teeth.
This information is vital in determining how this child can be diverted from further criminal activity.
Indeed, the current diversion practices are not working well, as evidenced by the monumental increase in young people’s offending. Their crimes of choice are more violent and pose a greater risk to the community and themselves than has ever been the case.
Rather than reducing crime as suggested, the new Youth Justice Bill is whitewashing criminal behaviour and, with it, the power of authorities to intervene and adjust young people’s behaviour.
As the legislation converts the previously criminal behaviour into non-criminal behaviour, it raises critical issues.
- What happens to a recidivist child who kills somebody or is killed in a stolen car – does the liability and responsibility lie with the Government?
- What action will the government take to stop the young from being recruited by organised crime?
- Or, more importantly, given the current risks of terrorism, managing the recruitment of young people by extremists to inflict terror on the community.
- What recompense will victims of what would otherwise be crimes receive?
It is well understood that children often do not comprehend the total consequences of their actions. As we head for a dismantling of processes designed to manage young people committing anti-social acts, for all its faults, the effort should focus on improving the current system rather than throwing it out and installing an untested system that is not based on any empirical foundation.
Our children are too important to be used in a social experiment.
by CAA | Aug 6, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues
The evolution of Policing in Victoria and elsewhere has seen the introduction and division of policing function into two distinct genera. Proactive and Reactive. Prior to the 1980s, reactive policing was the norm.
When proactive policing philosophies were introduced, most police initially treated the proactive philosophy with disdain and distrust, claiming they were being made to go soft on crime; dogged police leadership prevailed.
Over a remarkably short period, in terms of policing history, the concept most derided became accepted as most thinking Police came to understand its effectiveness.
The definitions of the two theories are simplified by the National Institute of Justice in the United States,
The term “proactive policing” encompasses several methods designed to reduce crime through prevention strategies and stands in contrast to conventional “reactive” policing.
Example 1 – Proactive functions – foot patrols
Foot patrols are one of the most effective proactive strategies often maligned as old-fashioned; although if undertaken by experienced police, it has an outstanding positive effect on the community and an equally disincentive on crime.
Over the last decade or so, the effective foot patrol police appear not to have received the focus and training this policing tool deserves to maximise its effectiveness. Some police have clearly had no training in the art of foot patrol; they end up seeing it as an opportunity to stroll around engaged with their partner and not the community.
Apart from a lack of training, the ineffectiveness of competent supervision is a significant contributor.
This untrained, unsupervised approach raises the issue of Police safety. Being engaged with their partner/s dramatically diminishes the most important survival skill: situational awareness.
In the past, newly graduated police spent their initial policing on foot patrol of Melbourne CBD one-up. The only accoutrements were their baton and handcuffs, so learning situation awareness was a critical survival skill.
Whether it is two up patrols or more, as is now the norm, the public is excluded from contact as police-to-police interactions act as a barrier to public discourse and, in equal part, raises substantially the risk to the police by inattentiveness to their environment, increasing the danger of being targeted.
Whether it is a regular patrol, engaging with children in their schools, dealing with aged care issues, or interacting with community groups, allowing a spasmodic approach to develop reflects poorly on management rather than the members concerned.
The other key element of Proactive policing is consistency. So sometimes, management must ring-fence the proactive function to gain the effectiveness it can deliver.
For the most part, it responds to crime that has occurred.
Example 2 – reactive policing.
A good example is the current media dubbed ‘tobacco wars’.
There is no argument that this requires a reactive response, and that is occurring; however, the ‘wars’ have escalated to a level where, despite their best efforts, regional reactive approaches are not stemming the problem, and the demand for a more assertive and a more coordinated approach was needed.
A Task Force has been established to target the problem.
The response is appropriate in the circumstances as the problem exceeds the capacity of a proactive approach; however, the claim that this Task force-targeted approach is proactive is a misnomer.
Targeting a crime that has been committed is a reaction to the crime; therefore, this function is reactive and should not be confused with proactive.
Unfortunately, the cause of this ‘war’ has not been addressed, so the chances of police ending it are minimal at best.
The problem has evolved through the greed of successive governments, which raised tobacco excise to exorbitant levels under the guise of a health initiative.
With the loss of excise and the costs associated with the criminal activities of the black market, it is probable that the government may end up earning more income from the sum of the majority of tobacco sales at a much-reduced excise than from only a small proportion as it currently does.
From a health perspective, it is highly improbable that smoking will rise to the levels of years ago; the community has moved on from that social habit.
This would disrupt the black-market business model. Additionally, coupled with a licencing scheme for retailers to sell the product, it could sound the death knell of this criminal endeavour overnight.
Remove the profit from criminals and solve the problem.
Reluctance to implement a solution must draw our attention to who benefits, and whether corrupt practices are at play, and by whom.
From a community perspective, the concept of eudaemony is better achieved through proactive policing supported by reactive policing than the other way around.
Focus on stopping crime before it happens rather than picking up the pieces after.
The proactive model in policing theory has and always will have its detractors. The temptation for Police leaders to use proactive resources to focus on reactive functions is often too great to ignore. What they fail to understand is that proactive policing is a slow burn.
Interruptions usually set it back considerably, and the overall benefit for short-term reactive functions is questionable and lacks management foresight. The price of these interventions can be just too high and reflects poorly on the understanding of the proactive philosophy.
Piecemeal proactive activities will produce piecemeal to mediocre results. A management-focused commitment to the principle is needed for the proactive function to be effective.
In the past, every police member seeking promotion had to demonstrate their understanding and contribution to the proactive philosophy.
Those police who have been involved in Proactive policing during their careers will vehemently defend the concept, having experienced first-hand its effectiveness in reducing crime and social disorder.
When proactive policing was introduced, management found that the police’s eagerness to become involved led to many initiatives driven from the bottom up rather than those imposed from the top down. These initiatives were highly successful and contributed substantially to police welfare at the time, as they owned the programs. Blue Light Discos is a prime example. They were conceived at a local police station to become a National and International policing phenomenon.
Coincidentally, police Post-Traumatic Stress, although referred to then as just Stress, diminished compared to post-administrations that have stifled these initiatives. Read into that what you will.
Enlightened management encouraged and guided the initiatives, but sadly, two decades ago, an ill-informed and incompetent administration all but dispensed with those programmes.
We are confident that if you asked the community that police serve, they would encourage police to expand the prevention policy and prevent crime.
Proactive vs. Reactive is not an either-or proposition but an overarching police philosophy that, if managed correctly, will benefit the community and the police by delivering the services of a modern approach to law enforcement.
There is a tendency for Policing to default to the pre-1980s style of policing, a trend that must be altered.
by CAA | Jul 30, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues
Magistrate Brett Sonnett, as reported in the Herald Sun, has strongly criticized the Police for charging offenders accused of serious offences on summons. This practice could potentially impact the safety and security of the public.
However, the current revolving door in relation to bail in some courts poses a far greater safety risk for the public.
His Honours blast was misplaced.
We have no knowledge of any organised stance or policy within VicPol to use summons more widely. Still, it must be remembered that the Constables’ decision in this process is exercising their Common Law right of discretion.
Police constables are not soldiers working to the beat of the Courts or anybody else’s drum, and the Courts must be more careful when challenging the right of a ‘constable of police’. Common law discretion is territory the courts may find has a sting in its tail.
The issue of bail has been contentious, with the community expressing significant concern about the courts’ interpretations. The public is disturbed by the frequent release of violent offenders on bail, to the extent that the chances of a prisoner being remanded in custody are akin to winning Tatslotto.
The most current example of a seventeen-year-old allegedly responsible for the death of a young doctor was granted bail and within hours breached the bail conditions and, then returned to court, was inexplicably granted bail yet again. Apparently, allegedly killing somebody is insufficient reason to refuse bail.
As much as some in the judiciary see the hierarchy of courts as boundaries not to be crossed, the public sees the Courts as one entity. If one jurisdiction develops unacceptable practices in the community, all court jurisdictions are tarred with the same brush.
His honour should have a good look at the performance of Magistrates and Judges relating to the bail issue across the Court system. Where there is a propensity to bail violent or other serious offenders in a high proportion of the matters before that jurisdiction, take action, and then the Police may have more confidence in bringing them before a Court by arrest.
The police’s propensity to use a Summons rather than apply to a Court for remand is a symptom of the court’s failure to read the public’s concern.
The government blames the Courts, and the Courts blame the Government, but like the Police, the Courts have discretion in interpreting the legislation.
Mr Sonnett should show more respect for the police, as they deal with these offenders and their victims on a daily basis. This contrasts with the judiciary, which only sees perpetrators in the sterile Court, and even then, the defendants are represented by their Lawyers.
The judiciary is generally shielded from the public, and they are not generally exposed to the community outrage over the bailing processes currently in vogue.
Therefore, it is inevitable that the police will continue to exercise their discretion to proceed by summons until the Court’s do not so readily bail recidivist and violent offenders.
It is clear that the Police have lost confidence in the Courts. In the collective years of experience of the former Police members of the CAA, amounting to some four hundred years, this is the first time in memory that the Courts, by their actions, have caused Police to lose confidence, not so much in individual Judicial officers, but in the broader court function.
The police’s lack of trust in the Courts reflects the community’s attitude as a whole; the police are just opening the window.
Mr Sonnett could do well directing his energy toward rebuilding the long-term trust the Police used to have in the Courts; repairing that will go a long way to rebuilding community trust.
The current media discussion of placing cameras in all courtrooms to remove the judiciary’s anonymity and create accountability for their work has some merit.
Letting the light in is sometimes the best sanitiser.
by CAA | Jul 27, 2024 | Library, Youth
Pic courtesy Herald Sun
To say the CAA has deep concerns about this Bill and the adverse impact it will have on youth crime in this state is a gross understatement.
What is generally not well understood is that this Bill is ‘the foot in the door’ for further introducing the concept of ‘Restorative Justice’, a monumental change in how Justice is dispensed in this State.
Significant changes included in this Bill include the plethora of conferences and committees required to manage each offender instead of the concept of punishment and accountability, which has been whitewashed out of this Bill.
Effectively, a child can take a position where they will not comply with any processes available to the Courts or any other authorities under this Bill, and nothing can be done about it. No punishment can be applied, regardless of the child’s actions.
We suspect that the majority of the community and many politicians do not understand the consequences this Bill will generate, none of them good.
Why wasn’t the community advised of this change? We are unaware of where the Government of the day achieved a mandate for such a severe and monumental change to the principles of Justice.
It took five years to draft, underscoring the difficulty and, given the outcome, incompetence displayed in the principles that have evolved to form this Bill.
They all will continue to stoke crime, not diminish it.
A fable best describes this Bill;
‘A committee was formed to design a Horse ( the Bill to Reform Youth Justice), but they came up with a camel ( no ordinary Camel but a two-humped Bactrian Camel with three legs).’
With all the effort of five years, the Bill as presented does not address the issue the community now faces and is riddled with extreme socialist ideology and drafted by a committee that has no understanding of the people they are supposed to be protecting. It will feed the crime wave.
The Bill misses the mark by a long way.
Central to the flaw in this Bill is the assumption that children under thirteen (13) cannot form criminal intent.
This assumption isn’t based on any empirical data and flies in the face of the reality of the evolution of human development.
Over the last two decades, the development of young people has accelerated faster than any other preceding era.
The speed at which this has occurred is most evident in the last ten years when evolution achieved warp speed, driven by two significant factors: Nutrition and Technology.
The ‘canary in the coal mine’, generally ignored, has been the accelerated crime rate by Juveniles and the failure to recognise the changes that were occurring in front of us all.
Nutrition
The impact of a higher level of nutrition in recent times must be seen as positive as young people will probably grow up healthier than their predecessors, but with that nutrition comes increased physical development. It’s not an issue until you realise that young people, on average, are taller and better developed physically than their predecessors. A phenomenon that immature minds can and do exploit.
Technology
There can be no argument that the development of technology has and continues to accelerate at warp speed and that the young people born in this era are the ones that maximise its use. They are more connected and have access to more data than previous generations ever dreamed of. This massive influx of good and bad information has developed young people’s mental acuity well beyond the perceived norm.
Still, they lack the ability and maturity to process and analyse this data effectively, leading them to emulate others without understanding the consequences or ignoring the consequences because there are none.
These phenomena point to the main flaw in the Bill and the poor consideration of youth development, both physically and mentally, in its drafting.
Today, a 10 – 12-year-old is the equivalent of a 13–15-year-old ten years ago.
The Bill is headed in the wrong direction and should instead be lowering the age of criminal responsibility, not lifting it.
Lowering the age to 8-10 years old will allow young people who are developing into and headed toward crime, the ability for effective early intervention, not waiting until they are older and more entrenched in crime.
Early intervention will reduce crime and improve the chances of young people developing without the stigma of exposure to Legal processes.
Why do we have to wait until a young person starts to climb the hierarchy of crime before any action is taken?
The Bill is not about Youth and crime. Its only function is to divert young people away from the judicial system with no attempt to distract them from crime before they get involved or turn them away from committing further crimes.
Of great concern to the CAA is that the Bill leans heavily on the ideologically experimental concept of Restorative Justice that, even relying on questionable research, raises significant concerns about its efficacy.
Not only does the concept have a questionable ability to influence crime reduction, but it is also extremely cumbersome. It would be costly to initiate its recommended functions in this Bill, requiring a department to administer this part alone for questionable outcome benefits. The failure of Restorative Justice benefits vested interests, not the community.
The things that Bill aims to,
- Promote the broader use of the failed socialist dream of Restorative Justice, a concept of unrealistic goals that lack credibility, and research to support its efficacy. This Social experiment has already failed to live up to its hype. A concept requiring vast administrative support (and funding) for little or any identifiable valuable outcomes for the community.
- Allow a child to ignore the ten processes created by this Bill without consequences, ensuring the ineffective and wasted time and resources. All talk, no action.
- The CAA notes that the Bill requires the child’s consent for almost all interventions, which empowers the child to avoid any undesirable consequences of their actions.
- It will necessitate a considerable increase in the public service to cope with the massive increase in data management and processes this Bill creates.
- There will be an unrealistic load put on an already stretched Police Force to achieve compliance. (Taking police off the road to be administrators rather than being on patrol to reduce crime.)
- It will increase the severity and frequency of crime not only in the youth area but overall, as younger children coached by older criminals are encouraged to commit crimes as there are no consequences. (No offences for coaching children into crime in the Bill -most of those who coach will be children themselves)
The unintended consequences of the Bill are substantial and mirror the unintended consequences (fatal) of the Public Order Bill that removed the power of Police to intervene in public drunkenness.
The Bill fails;
- To hold children to age-appropriate accountabilities and consequences. It erases accountability and accountability as the basis of a deterrent.
- The bill intimidates the judiciary from imposing custodial consequences when a child continues ignoring the lectures and threats made by judicial officers or breaches Bail.
- By not referring to Prevention as a legitimate function and requirement to avoid children entering the Justice system, this document only has effect when the child has offended It’s then too late.
- No Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for any participants delivering the Bill.
- No provision for research.
- There is no clear direction as to who is responsible for the Bill’s application and coordination of service providers. The proposed Commissioner couldn’t cope with this function without a huge staff.
- What do the Service Providers do, and how are they assessed?
More specifically, our concerns relate to;
- Addressing the Drug issue with children in either use or participation in the trade. The recidivist juvenile is the addict of tomorrow.
- Lack of accountability of Parents – sanctions for parental failure.
We have identified the basis of this Bill, and it has, as we suggest, little to do with Youth or, more specifically, their criminal activity and how that might be prevented in the first place.
The concept of prevention before they commit a crime has been overlooked entirely, as the intent, in our view, is to write much of the Restorative Justice Philosophy that can be achieved, into legislation.
Giving this untested experimental concept the credibility of forming the basis of this Bill and using this Bill to provide status to this concept by using our children as pawns is unconscionable.
The Government is now looking to fast-track this Bill under the guise of addressing the current crime Tsunami.
New South Wales addressed the Recidivist Youth issue with a few minor changes to the wording relating to Youth Bail provisions.
Assessing their strategy, they are dealing with the issue from the juvenile perspective, not some ideological dream.
The youths are being remanded in custody, and that is punishment in the child’s mind and will act as a bigger deterrent than all the conferences that can be dreamt up.
This Bill needs to be stopped until proper analysis, and strategy can be developed – one that will work.
by CAA | Jul 25, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library
An insightful article and video from our partners, the Dalgarno Institute.
The video is of an interview between Andy, a recovered Ice addict and Shane Varcoe, the CEO of the Dalgano Institute. Although this interview was done in 2015, it is perhaps more relevant today and gives an insight into the wrong-headed thinking of the so-called experts who advise the government on drug-related issues. Andy’s experience should motivate all clear thinkers that new and informed approach must be adopted .
You are sure to be surprised at the issues that Andy exposes – CAA
WRD NEWS
Andy’s Journey: From Ice Addiction to Recovery
July 24, 2024By WRD News Team
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Andy’s story is a powerful testament to the challenges of ice addiction and the complexities of the recovery process. His journey, as shared in a candid interview, offers valuable insights into the realities of drug use, rehabilitation, and the systemic issues within current drug policies.
Early Beginnings
Andy’s relationship with substances began in his teenage years, starting with alcohol at age 13. While marijuana didn’t become a significant part of his life, alcohol remained a constant until he graduated from university in 2004. Following a period of sobriety, Andy’s life took a turn when his business failed and his mother fell ill.
The Descent into Ice Addiction
Struggling with depression and worry, Andy first tried ice (crystal methamphetamine) as a way to cope. The initial experience provided energy and alertness, seemingly alleviating his concerns. However, his mother’s tragic passing due to medical complications became the catalyst for increased drug use. Andy’s habit escalated rapidly, reaching consumption levels of up to 1.7 grams daily.
Andy’s addiction led to multiple arrests and periods of incarceration. His experiences in custody, particularly during the smoking riots at Melbourne Remand Centre, proved to be a turning point. The inhumane conditions and prolonged period without drugs forced Andy to confront his addiction.
The Rehabilitation Journey
Andy’s path to recovery involved participation in drug court programs and various rehabilitation efforts. He highlights the importance of drug courts in providing support but also notes the challenges within the system. Andy’s experiences shed light on the complexities of recovery, including the risk of relapse and the impact of triggers.
Insights on Current Drug Policies
Andy offers critical perspectives on current drug policies and rehabilitation programs:
- Inconsistencies in messaging: He points out the conflicting messages between legal stance and harm reduction approaches.
- Problematic rehabilitation strategies: Andy discusses how certain programs, intended to help, can sometimes trigger cravings or relapses.
- The need for improved in-custody programs: He emphasises the potential for effective rehabilitation during incarceration, if more comprehensive programs were available.
- Criticism of proposed solutions: Andy expresses scepticism about initiatives like ice smoking rooms, highlighting the potential negative impacts on recovering addicts and the broader community.
Andy’s story underscores several key points:
- The importance of addressing underlying issues in addiction treatment
- The need for consistent messaging in drug policies
- The potential of incarceration as a rehabilitation opportunity, if properly structured
- The challenges faced by recovering addicts in maintaining sobriety, especially when confronted with triggers or old associates
Andy’s candid sharing of his experiences provides invaluable insights into the world of ice addiction and recovery. To gain a deeper understanding of his journey and the issues he raises, readers are encouraged to watch the full YouTube video here.
by CAA | Jul 23, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library, Safe Injecting Rooms
Another insightful article from ‘Break the Needle’. The Canadian experiences with Illicit drugs seem to precede the experiences here in Victoria as the government has guided us towards the first step in a broader application of the ‘Safe Suppy’ slide with the introduction of Pill testing. With similar advocates in Victoria promoting drug proliferation, having access to the Canadian experiences gives Victoria a head start to alter course and impact the toll that drugs are taking on our predominantly younger generation.
Drug facilitation by governments all have one thing in common: they increase the use of illegal narcotics, and there is never any evidence that the addiction diminishes, but rather younger people enter the drug dependence regime convinced that because it is government-sanctioned, it must be safe.
This article highlights how drug apologists inject emotive words into their rhetoric, like the use of ‘fake news’, ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ to further promote the use of illicit drugs. – CAA
Claims about ‘safer supply’ diversion aren’t disinformation
This month, police in London, Ont., admitted to what critics have said all along: safer supply diversion is happening at alarming levels
Break The Needle
and
Sabrina Maddeaux
Jul 23, 2024
By Sabrina Maddeaux
Last spring, Canada’s minister of mental health and addictions claimed critics’ concerns about “safer supply” diversion — the illegal selling and trading of taxpayer-funded addictive drugs — were based on lies.
“For Pierre Poilievre to state untrue information about safer supply, and try to create barriers to accessing harm reduction services that are saving lives amid this ongoing crisis, is incredibly irresponsible and dehumanizing to people who use drugs,” read a statement by then-minister Carolyn Bennett’s office.
Fast forward a year, and it’s clear which side was telling the truth.
This month, police in London, Ont., admitted to what critics said all along: diversion of pharmaceutically supplied opioids to the streets is happening at alarming levels. London is home to Canada’s longest-running safer supply program, which dates back to 2016 and was significantly expanded in 2020.
The London Police Service released data that shows a staggering 3,000 per cent increase in the seizure of hydromorphone tablets — the opioid predominantly given out by safer supply programs — over the last five years. In 2019, London police seized just under 1,000 tablets. By 2020, that number had tripled. In 2023, they seized 30,000 hydromorphone tablets.
For context, hydromorphone is as potent as heroin and just two or three of these pills, if snorted, can cause an overdose in an inexperienced opioid user.
Earlier this month, the city’s deputy police chief, Paul Bastien, told CBC’s London Morning, “We recognize the value that safe supply plays as part of that harm reduction piece, but diversion is an important issue that is affecting community safety. I won’t say that everyone’s doing it, but some of the tablets from safe supply are being diverted for that purpose.”
“Criminal groups are fairly adept at exploiting policy changes that are well intended. But unforeseen consequences sometimes arise and this appears to be, at least in part, one of them,” he continued.
A reasonable person may assume that, given this alarming new evidence, proponents of safer supply would change their tune about widespread diversion being “fake news.” Unfortunately, they haven’t.
Some activists are now claiming on social media that London’s spike in hydromorphone seizures was not caused by safer supply, but rather by a high-profile theft of 245,000 hydromorphone tablets from an Ontario pharmacy. Yet the spike in seizures began years before this theft and, according to multiple addiction physicians, the street price of hydromorphone collapsed in the city well before 2023, suggesting an earlier influx of diverted supply.
However, these mental contortions aren’t surprising. As more and more evidence of widespread diversion emerged over the past year, accusations of disinformation and misinformation haven’t stopped –– they have simply evolved. The narrative changed from “Diversion doesn’t exist” to “Fine, it exists, but only on a small scale” to, now, “Fine, diversion exists at scale, but imagine the alternative?”
This is the angle already emerging in British Columbia, where the province’s top doctor, Bonnie Henry, authored a damning report that acknowledges the regularity and harms of safer supply diversion, yet still concludes safer supply is “ethically defensible” and advocates for its expansion.
Like many safer supply activists, Henry often argues diversion isn’t a significant concern because most opioid deaths are caused by fentanyl.
While it’s true that most opioid deaths are attributable to fentanyl, hydromorphone is still incredibly dangerous. When diverted into the black market, it creates new addictions, often among young people, which culminate in fentanyl use.
Moreover, data indicate hydromorphone is implicated in an increasing share of drug-related deaths in young people in B.C. In 2019, there were no reported deaths involving hydromorphone. By 2022, that number jumped to 22 per cent. Similarly, a recent report by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Ontario found the number of youth in the province who self-reported using prescription opioids for “non-medical” reasons jumped 71 per cent between 2021 and 2023.
Still, safer supply activists continue to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that widespread diversion isn’t happening.
In 2017, Collins Dictionary declared “fake news” the word of the year. Since then, the term –– along with sister terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” –– have taken on a disturbing new life.
While fake news, misinformation and disinformation are very real democratic threats, some politicians and activists realized they could delegitimize opponents’ arguments and unflattering media stories by simply proclaiming them fake. Now, we’re in the dizzyingly ironic position of real news, and real facts, being dismissed as misinfo and disinfo by self-declared guardians of the truth.
This is the exact problem journalists and concerned medical professionals continue to face when raising the alarm on so-called “safer supply.” Despite the abundance of solid reporting, emerging data, whistleblower warnings and first-hand accounts of widespread diversion, harm reduction activists and their allies in government don’t just recklessly dismiss the problem, they weaponize the language of fake news to discredit a reality they don’t like.
Communities across Canada, and addicts themselves, deserve better.
by CAA | Jul 22, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues, Youth
Pic. Courtesy Herald Sun
The community is tired of this continual waffle about getting tough on Youth crime. They want action, not words.
As victims accumulate at an alarming rate and the youth cohort becomes more violent and brash, the government’s rhetoric becomes more hollow and meaningless.
How many times do we hear that there is no problem, it is just a small cohort, or we have the lowest youth crime figures in Australia only to be told the next day that the independent Crime Statistics Agency has debunked the government claims?
Yet again, this headline – appeared in the Herald Sun on July 21, 2024
ALLAN GOVT SET TO STRENGTHEN VICTORIA’S YOUTH BAIL LAWS IN A CRACKDOWN ON CRIME
Suggesting that the government is dithering would perhaps be an understatement because the changes they are considering will be to the Youth Justice Bill before Parliament.
If passed, this Bill, some 900 pages long, will make the current situation look benign. Yong people will have no barriers or accountability to control their criminal behaviour.
Astoundingly, the drafting of this Bill took five years: five years to rewrite the laws regarding youth offenders and five years to mess it up completely.
The CAA has examined the Bill and were shocked at its ineptitude, particularly,
- not one reference in the 900 pages to any effort or strategy to avoid children becoming involved in crime in the first place,
- a focus solely on diverting children from the legal system no matter what they do,
- victims only received very scant references and no consideration,
- children are treated like disposable commodities as there is no mention of protecting a child for themselves, a concept too difficult for the architects of the Bill to contemplate,
- the real kicker was the complete avoidance of any reference to accountability by young offenders.
This Bill is so bad that our critique ran to ten pages,
The bill also lifts the age of criminal responsibility, initially to twelve and later fourteen, currently ten years. This alone makes the bill a joke as while the ideological dreamers may hold sway over the government, the Crime Statistics Agency has children aged 10 or 11 years old recording a 52.6 per cent spike in the number of offences committed, and they want to make those offences go away by classifying those perpetrators as exempt from prosecution.
The age changes may help the shocking statistics but won’t help the children or the victims, but neither of them matters much when statistics are under pressure. One result that can be guaranteed is that the number of victims will increase exponentially.
Try and explain this drivel to a victim of weapon-wielding children in this age bracket or explain why there was no intervention of the younger children to steer them away from further crime. By age thirteen, their behaviour will be entrenched and nearly impossible to divert.
To aggravate the incompetence, the government proposes legislating the Police Cautioning Program, which has successfully diverted thousands of children from its inception many decades ago.
This program is arguably the most effective mechanism developed to divert young people from crime, but being good makes it a target.
The proven adage of ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ should apply.
by CAA | Jul 16, 2024 | Drunk, Family Violence, Library, Road Safety, Victoria Police Issues
Police arrest the thieves, and courts release them. There has to be a better way.
That way is what the CAA calls the G-Tag (Electronic Vehicle tracking).
If the Government won’t bring the Courts into line to do their job, then the community will have to take action.
Every day, we are told of yet another shocking crime or string of crimes to which a Motor car is central, but the government sits on its hands and takes no action apart from the odd manipulation of statistics to deflect criticism.
First and foremost, the judiciary has failed, and its role now must be evaluated based on the ineffectiveness of its penalties by Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
The Key indicator is the primary function of a sentence: general deterrence. However, this has been lost in the mire of so-called diversions, few of which divert the offenders from more crime.
If a judicial officer’s adjudication is below a benchmark performance (KPI), and particularly if the sentencing fails to achieve the primary objective of deterring others, then they need to explain their failure, and where that failure is consistent, they should be removed from the bench.
The reality is that if the circa 20,000 cars and other vehicles that are stolen annually and used by criminals were made unusable for their criminal activities, the theft of cars would drop dramatically, and with it, the crime the vehicles facilitate.
There would not only be a massive crime drop but also a massive impact on car owners’ safety and reduced cost, as the dramatic drop in Victorian fleet thefts would force insurers to lower premiums as the risk factors diminish.
The Courts have failed to reign in crime and blame the government, which, in turn, accuses the Courts.
Additionally, the Government has been made aware of an alternate plan since 2016 but considers the plan not even worthy of discussing with the CAA.
The problem with the plan we agree, challenges the status quo, but the status quo doesn’t help the thousands of victims; the G-Tag will.
See,
https://caainc.org.au/g-tag-a-new-paradigm-in-community-safety
https://caainc.org.au/?s=G-Tag
There is, however, an alternate option: bypassing the government.
The alternative is providing the private sector with the opportunity to implement the G-Tag.
A subscription service to protect vehicles would be cost-effective for owners who could offset some of the cost with reduced premiums from insurers and provide a disabling capacity for vehicles if they are stolen, which could be a viable alternative to waiting for the government.
The money this would save the State purse by reducing crime and processing criminals would justify some relief for those who subscribe to the G-Tag service.
The security industry already operates control rooms that monitor security equipment, and some companies monitor the movement of ankle bracelets, so providing a G-Tag service would not be a significant technological step.
Although technology is unlikely to stop a vehicle from being stolen as soon as the owner is aware, the car can be disabled, making it useless for the crooks.
Most high-end vehicles already have the technology built-in, and other vehicles are relatively cheap to equip.
The disruption to the crook’s plans would deter them from stealing any vehicle with a G-Tag sticker on the window.
The G-Tag can put a vehicle into ‘limp home mode’, reducing its maximum speed to 80 KPH, and then disable the engine when it is safe.
The police can be notified of the incident and organise an interception coordinated with the use of the vehicle’s disabling capacity.
One distinct advantage is that thieves are unlikely to have the opportunity to torch the vehicle, destroying evidence.
A negotiation with the E-Tag operators could make this concept more viable.
It is a big challenge; however, if we wait for the government, it will never happen, and the crooks will continue to operate with gay abandon, and victims will continue to be put at risk because of government inaction.
Whether you are an Uber Driver or a Mum on the school run, we must lift their protection.
The CAA calls on entrepreneurial businesses who might be interested in exploring this concept to contact us at info@caainc.org.au
by CAA | Jul 10, 2024 | Library, Youth
(‘Whack-a-Mole’ is a 1970s arcade-style game that lives up to its name. It consists of Moles popping up out of their burrows randomly and the players trying to wack them with a mallet.)
At a time when the youth crisis is in an out-of-control spiral, irrespective of how the government tries to spin the problem, the Government is using the police force in a futile effort to resolve the issue by forcing them to play ‘Wack-A-Mole‘
Additionally, the government trumpets action, which turns out to be inaction, that the community is supposed to accept, but it is all smoke and mirrors with no clear strategy.
The problem that we face with young people and crime, in general, is that nobody is doing anything about reducing crime before it occurs. They would rather play ‘Wack-a-Mol’,
As reported in the Herald Sun,
- Vehicle thefts have jumped by 25% to 40000.
- 59,000 motorists had valuables stolen from their vehicles.
And the advice for drivers was to lock their cars and hide valuables – the victim’s fault.
These statistics become more concerning yearly – more offences, more victims.
This crime is shared between opportunistic drug addicts to fund their addiction and juveniles out for ‘the thrill’. The crime surge is the fault of weak legislation and poor strategies to combat crime. Blaming the victim is unforgivable.
But never fear. The government has spent five years drafting a new Youth Justice Bill to address the current anomalies in the Judicial system.
The Bill, if enacted in its present form, will add to the crime problem, not diminish it, as its sole focus is diverting young people from the Justice system after they offend, and its 900 pages do not mention once, what can be done with younger children, to divert them from crime. However, it expends a lot of words to remove concepts of accountability and consequences from all young offenders.
It also lifts the age of criminal responsibility to 13 years from 10 years, an ideological whim not only contradicts the empirical evidence published by government agencies but expends no energy on how these children in that underage cohort who commit crimes will be dealt with.
‘Alarming statistics released in June found crimes involving children as young as ten had soared to their highest level since 2010, with a 52.6 per cent spike in offences committed by ten and 11-year-olds.
Children aged 10 to 13 years old were responsible for 84 aggravated burglaries, while those aged 14 to 17 were considered to be “over-represented” in burglaries, assaults, robberies and car thefts – HS 10.7.2024
A cynic may suggest that the statistics don’t show children younger than 10 committing crimes because they are below the legislated age of criminal intent. That cohort will show a 100% decline in children aged 10 and 11 committing crimes when the age is lifted.
Will the government exploit this statistical foible to pretend they’re solving the problem? Doubtless, they will.
With contributions like ‘dob in a mate’ the latest government offering, all we can say is, ‘good luck with that’. However, it points to the disconnect between the government and its advisers and the real world.
The reality is that Police and the community will just have to wait until a perpetrator turns 13 before their criminal endeavours can perhaps be curtailed. On occasions, police in the past have had to wait until a child turns ten before they can be presented to the judicial system to curb their criminal behaviour.
These arbitrary age limits do not necessarily coincide with the child’s acuity development or when a child is acting in concert with others who may be older in the commission of crimes.
They must be scrapped.
Of course, being charged is only part of the problem. The main issues are,
The failure of the Bail Laws, which the Courts say is not their fault but the legislators, is the lamest excuse ever hidden behind, a weak excuse and entirely accurate.
- Failure to hold children to account for their actions.
If criminal behaviour does not have consequences, what motivation exists to change children’s behaviour – talk fests and meetings don’t cut it.
- Failure to apply sanctions for criminality.
The law is based, in part, on a fear (Deterrent factor) that certain unacceptable behaviours attract sanctions imposed by a Court, but illogically, this concept is removed from children, which is a significant part of the problem as they seldom suffer any accurate or effective sanctions.
The future for the children is not looking good; by the time their unlawful behaviour is checked, crime is entrenched in their psyche or soul, and the chances of rehabilitation are problematic.
Easy bail is only one of the many illogical approaches the government has persisted with, as, for example, the most recent absconding of a juvenile bailed on charges of culpable driving causing death after a stolen car he was allegedly driving ploughed into another vehicle, killing the occupant.
The perpetrator absconded within hours of being bailed, and the real fear is that he was behind the wheel of another stolen car. Now in custody, what he did for the three days on the run will no doubt be exposed in due course.
In this matter, the government and the courts have blood on their hands, but will that be enough to have them wake up and do their job in the community’s best interests?
The CAA calls on the government to act before more innocent lives are lost.
- Immediately amend the Bail Act to unshackle the Courts (who will then have no excuse) and follow the New South Wales model of liberalising the ability of the courts to reject applications for the privilege of Bail in appropriate cases.
- Immediately reinstate the offence of breach of bail conditions.
- Immediately abandon the notion of lifting the age for criminal intent. All children develop at different stages; therefore, the age is somewhat irrelevant anyway, and all ages should be removed instead, relying on the common law principle of doli incapaxa, a Latin phrase meaning “incapable of evil”, a defence available to all children. children under 14 years.
- Immediately develop proactive initiatives that divert young people from crime before offending rather than relying on diversion programs after offending.
- Immediately abandon the flawed Youth Justice Bill, which, if enacted, will increase the crime rate.
The ball is now squarely in the Government’s court, and a failure to act as outlined will condemn this government forever.
by CAA | Jul 8, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library, Victoria Police Issues
Yet another insightful article from Break the Needle.
We are thankfully not at this stage yet, but the efforts of our politicians and the trajectory they have put in place lead to some inevitability that we will as they push the failed ‘Harm Minimisation’ approach they have embraced – ‘Safer Supply’ will be the inevitable next step after safe injecting facilities and pill testing interventions that promote drug use.
The Canadian experience highlights the failure to recognise or accept that early
intervention is the only process that can reverse this trend from ruining lives.
…CAA comment.
………………………………….
Addiction physician Dr. Sharon Koivu has seen the effects of safer supply programs in her clinical practice and personal life — and is sounding the alarm
Having worked on the front lines of Ontario’s opioid crisis, she views these programs as a catastrophic failure.
In an extended interview, Koivu explained the unintended consequences of these programs, which offer free tablets of hydromorphone — an opioid about as strong as heroin – to vulnerable patients with a history of addiction. While advocates of safer supply claim it mitigates the use of more dangerous illicit substances, there is evidence that most users divert — that is, sell or trade — their hydromorphone to acquire stronger substances.
Safer supply was first piloted in London, Ont., in 2016, before being widely expanded across Canada in 2020 with the help of generous federal grants. While the program looked good on paper, Koivu, who provides comprehensive addiction consultation services at a London-based hospital, saw a different reality: her patients were destabilising, relapsing and fatally overdosing because of safer supply.
Koivu says that “one hundred percent” of her colleagues working in addiction medicine have noticed safer supply diversion. Some patients have told her they have been threatened with violence if they do not procure and divert these drugs. She estimates that, because of safer supply, tens of thousands of diverted hydromorphone pills — also known as “Dilaudid,” “dillies” or “D8s” — are flooding into Canadian streets every day.
For context, just two or three of these pills, if snorted, are enough to induce an overdose in a new user.
This influx has caused the drug’s street price to crash by as much as 95 per cent. While 8-milligram hydromorphone pills used to sell for $20 each several years ago, they can now be bought for as little as a dollar or two. These rock-bottom prices have ignited a new wave of addictions and relapses, and lured opioid-naive individuals into experimenting with what is essentially pharmaceutical heroin.
Koivu estimates that 80 per cent of her opioid-using patients now take diverted hydromorphone.
“The biggest harm is that we’ve turned on the tap and we’ve made everything cheap, which is leading to a large increase in the number of people becoming addicted and suffering,” she said.
“It is the most serious issue that I’ve seen in my lifetime.”
Safer supply programs seem to regularly overprescribe opioids without considering patients’ actual needs, Koivu says. Patients have come into her hospital with prescriptions that provide 40 eight-milligram hydromorphone pills a day, even though they can only tolerate 10 pills.
‘That attraction is horrific’
Throughout the first few decades of Koivu’s career, almost “everyone” in her patient pool developed addictions due to childhood traumas or from mishandling opioids prescribed for chronic pain.
Since the advent of safer supply, the origins of new opioid addictions have shifted toward social or recreational exposure. Concerningly, this exposure often occurs in patients’ adolescent years.
“I’m seeing an increase in youth becoming addicted,” said Koivu, who has had patients as young as 15 tell her their addictions began through diverted hydromorphone.
“Almost everyone I see who’s started since 2018 started recreationally. It started as something that was at a party. It’s now a recreational drug at the youth level.”
Parents often seem completely unaware of the problem. Some have told Koivu they overheard their children discussing the availability of “D8s” at their high schools, only to later realise — when it was too late — they were referring to opioids.
“You can’t walk into your house with a six-pack of beer. If you’re smoking weed, people can smell it. But you can walk into your house with a lot of [tablets] in your pocket. So, it’s cheap, really easy to hide, and is even called ‘safe’ by the government. I think that attraction is horrific.”
“Our youth are dying at a higher rate … and we have a lot more hydromorphone found in [their bodies] at the time of death.”
While safer supply programs claim to make communities safer, Koivu’s lived experiences suggest the opposite. She used to reside in London’s Old East Village, where the city’s first safer supply program opened in 2016, but moved away after watching her neighbourhood deteriorate from widespread crime, overdoses and drug trafficking.
“I moved there to support a supervised injection site,” said Koivu. “Then I watched that community drastically change when safer supply was implemented. … I would go for walks and directly see diversion taking place. Homelessness is very complicated, but this has absolutely fuelled it in ways that are unconscionable.”
Koivu characterises the evidentiary standards used by advocates of safer supply as “deeply problematic.” She says many of the studies supporting safer supply are qualitative — meaning they rely on interviews — and use anecdotal data from patients who have a vested interest in perpetuating the program.
While Koivu has been blowing the whistle on safer supply programs for years, her concerns largely went unnoticed until recently. She has faced years of harassment and denigration for her views.
“When I came to say I’m concerned about what I’m seeing: the infections, the suffering, the encampments … I was literally told that I was lying,” she said.
Last month, the London Police Service provided the National Post with data showing that annual hydromorphone seizures increased by 3,000 per cent after access to safer supply was significantly expanded in 2020. The newspaper has since raised questions about why this data was not released earlier and whether the police stonewalled attempts to investigate the issue.
Koivu considers herself a lifelong progressive and has historically supported the New Democratic Party. But she is concerned many left-leaning politicians have ignored criticism of safer supply. Many seemingly believe that opposition to it is inherently conservative.
“I went to a hearing in Ottawa of a standing committee to talk about addiction,” she said. “We had five minutes to give a talk and then two hours to answer questions, [but] I didn’t receive any questions from the NDP or the Liberals.”
Although Koivu believes safe supply can play a role in the continuum of care for opioid addiction, she says it must be executed in a meticulous manner that prevents diversion and emphasises pathways to recovery.
“It needs to be part of a comprehensive strategy to help people get their lives back. And right now, it’s not.”
Above all, it is Koivu’s experience as a mother that drives her to criticize safer supply. One of her sons struggled with opioid addiction as a young adult. Although he eventually recovered, the experience could have killed him.
“Had this program been around … my family could have been another statistic from an opioid death. That drives me. Because it’s very real, and it’s very personal.”
by CAA | Jul 7, 2024 | Illicit Drugs, Library, Youth
This article gives an insight into the direction and traps in managing drug addiction.
Canada has been the window to the future of the drug addiction problem in Australia. It has shown the world the contrasting outcome of pragmatic management as opposed to the id
We will bring you further articles authorised to be published by Break the Needle, giving a window into where the drug epidemic is headed and what works and what doesn’t. We would do well to note the Canadian experience.
We have our own conflicted approach, with one arm of the government expending vast resources trying to control the illicit drug trade and use, the Legal system and the Health system dealing with the consequences of use, while all the while the government is promoting and facilitating drug use, with the Drug Injecting Room and further promotion of safe drugs, the Pill Testing service.
Captured by the failed ‘Harm Minimisation’ fallacy, we can expect the next big thing will be an emphasis on ‘Safer Supply’. The toe is already in the door with Pill Testing.
Opioid seizures exploded by 3,000% in Ontario City after a “safer supply” experiment.
Doctors and journalists wondering why local police failed to disclose concerning statistics to the public sooner.
JUL 07, 2024
A London (Canada) police drug seizure in April included 9,298 Dilaudid eight-milligram tablets.
By Matthew Hannick
Nigel Stuckey saved more lives during the last five years of his policing career than the previous three decades combined. “Every time you go back to the street, it has a different flavour,” said Stuckey, a former sergeant with the London Police Service (LPS) who retired in 2022. “As a frontline police officer, you are constantly going to overdoses in the city. I’ve administered Narcan to multiple people, and this is just something that never existed before.”
Stuckey first noticed a dramatic increase in overdoses and drug-related crimes occurring throughout his city – London, Ontario – in 2019. While the reasons behind this increase were initially unclear, recent data released by the LPS suggest that “safer supply” programs may be contributing to the problem.
Safer supply programs aim to save lives by providing drug users with pharmaceutical-grade alternatives to the untested street supply. That typically means distributing hydromorphone, a heroin-strength opioid, as an alternative to illicit fentanyl. However, addiction experts say the program is having the opposite effect, as many people who are enrolled in safer supply programs are illegally selling or trading their prescribed hydromorphone on the black market, a practice known as “diversion.”
Harm reduction advocates claim that safer supply diversion is not a significant issue, but according to an investigation into London Police Services (LPS) seizure data by journalist Adam Zivo, the number of hydromorphone tablets seized in London increased by 3,000 per cent after access to safer supply was greatly expanded in 2020.
In 2019, the LPS seized fewer than 1,000 hydromorphone tablets. This number jumped significantly in 2020 and continued to rise afterwards, reaching 30,000 tablet seizures last year – an unprecedented amount. The London police estimate that last year’s record will be met or exceeded by the end of 2024.
Doctors have said that this is only representative of a small fraction of what is actually out there, and that just 3-4 of these pills, if snorted, are enough to induce an overdose in a new user.
Some people are wondering why this data wasn’t released months, if not years, earlier.
Dr. Sharon Koivu, a London-based addiction physician, was among the first to recognize the harms of safer supply and has been warning the public about widespread diversion for years. Based on her clinical experiences, she believes that diverted safer supply hydromorphone is causing new addictions and falling into the hands of youth.
When Koivu tried to speak out against safer supply and call attention to diversion and an overall lack of program transparency, she was bullied and told that the suffering she was witnessing didn’t exist. This harassment was so severe that her mental health deteriorated and she worried about whether her career had been irreversibly damaged – yet the London police had quietly possessed data showing that she was right all along.
“It’s become an ideological thing,” she said. “People seem to have doubled down on the information they have. They don’t want to hear from someone who has information and concerns that don’t align with their, I’m going to say, ideology – because it’s not science.”
News of skyrocketing hydromorphone seizures might have remained hidden from the public had it not been for a major bust earlier this year.
On April 12, the London police announced a drug seizure which included 9,298 hydromorphone eight-milligram tablets. When Zivo inquired into this seizure, he received no answers to his questions for almost two months. He says that he was “stonewalled” and that the police seemed unwilling to release key data until it became impossible for them not to.
Zivo found it particularly concerning that the 2019-2023 hydromorphone seizure data was not released earlier. “Journalists and addiction physicians have been trying to raise the alarm about this issue for years,” he said, “but have been called liars, grifters and fearmongers, despite the fact that data validating their concerns existed and was held by the London Police Service.”
Stuckey, who now works as a documentary filmmaker covering London’s homelessness, addiction and mental health crisis, had a similar experience when he queried the LPS about the 9,290 hydromorphone pills seized this April.
Despite multiple requests for information about a possible connection to safer supply, the police service did not get back to him. He expressed frustration at the police’s unresponsiveness and worried that a lack of government transparency is endangering both the general public and law enforcement officers.
“Members of the London Police Service are being put in harm’s way dealing with organized crime and firearms to take drugs off the street, which were provided by the federal government. It’s absolute lunacy that we are paying one branch of government to rid a problem that was created by another branch of government,” said Stuckey.
It would be deeply concerning if the LPS knowingly withheld data pertaining to safer supply diversion. Not only has the failure to publish such data hindered informed public debate and policy development, it has also compromised the safety of the very communities which police are tasked with protecting.
According to Zivo, safer supply programs have benefitted from the silence of powerful institutions like the LPS. He said that, as there seems to be significant institutional resistance to acknowledging the community harms of safer supply, then more attention and trust should be given to local grassroots-level addiction medicine practitioners “who are bravely testifying to what they are seeing in their clinics.”
However, Dr. Koivu thinks that “the tide is turning” and that more people are beginning to understand the harms of safer supply
“I think it’s unfortunate that this data wasn’t made available sooner, when it was relevant to the funding of these programs and the changes we’re seeing in the city. The police need to be accountable for that. I really don’t understand their rationale for not addressing this” she said. “They hung me out to dry while knowing that what I was saying was accurate. If the police are afraid to come forward, no wonder physicians are afraid to come forward, too.”
by CAA | Jul 6, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues, Youth
To say the CAA has deep concerns about this Bill and the adverse impact it will have on raising youth crime in this state is a gross understatement.
What is generally not well understood is that this Bill is ‘the foot in the door’ for further introducing the concept of ‘Restorative Justice’, a monumental change in how Justice is dispensed in this State.
A plan that promotes ideology over pragmatism.
Significant changes included in this Bill include the plethora of conferences and committees required to manage each offender instead of the concept of punishment and accountability, which has been whitewashed out of this Bill.
Preventing young people from committing crimes in the first place is not even mentioned.
Effectively, a child can take a position where they will not comply with any processes available to the Courts or any other authorities under this Bill, and nothing can be done about it. No punishment can be applied, regardless of the child’s actions.
We suspect that the majority of the community and many politicians do not understand the consequences of this Bill, and none of them are good.
Why wasn’t the community advised of this change? We are unaware of where the Government of the day achieved a mandate for such a severe and monumental change to the principles of Justice.
It took five years to draft, underscoring the difficulty and, given the outcome, incompetence displayed in the principles that have evolved to form this Bill.
This Bill will continue to stoke crime, not diminish it.
‘A committee was formed to design a Horse ( the Bill to Reform Youth Justice), but they came up with a camel ( no ordinary Camel but a two-humped Bactrian Camel with three legs).’
With all the effort of five years, the Bill as presented does not address the issue the community now faces and is riddled with extreme socialist ideology and drafted by a committee that has no understanding of the people they are supposed to be protecting. It will feed the crime wave.
The Bill misses the mark by a long way.
Central to the flaw in this Bill is the assumption that children under thirteen (13) cannot form criminal intent.
This assumption isn’t based on any empirical data and flies in the face of the reality of the evolution of human development.
Over the last two decades, the development of young people has accelerated faster than any other preceding era.
The speed at which this has occurred is most evident in the last ten years when evolution achieved warp speed, driven by two significant factors: Nutrition and Technology.
The ‘canary in the coal mine’, the juvenile crime surge, generally ignored, has seen the accelerated crime rate by Juveniles and the failure to recognise the changes that were occurring in front of us all.
Nutrition
The impact of a higher level of nutrition in recent times must be seen as positive as young people will probably grow up healthier than their predecessors, but with that nutrition comes increased physical development. It’s not an issue until you realise that young people, on average, are taller and better developed physically than their predecessors. A phenomenon that immature minds can and do exploit.
Technology
Technology continues to accelerate at warp speed, and young people born in this era are the ones who maximise its use. They are more connected and have access to more data than previous generations ever dreamed of. This massive influx of good and bad information has developed young people’s mental acuity well beyond the perceived norm. This has happened without comparative life skills development.
They, therefore, lack the ability and maturity to process and analyse this physical development effectively, leading them to emulate others without understanding the consequences or ignoring the consequences because there are none.
Impact
Today, a 10 – 12-year-old is the equivalent of a 13–15-year-old ten years ago.
The Bill is headed in the wrong direction and should instead be lowering the age of criminal responsibility, not lifting it, particularly when the child understands what they did was criminal.
Lifting the age of criminal intent to 12 years before children can be charged with a crime, irrespective of their development, is a recipe for increased crime. Waiting until they are older before any legal intervention can occur entrenches the child further into crime, making efforts to rehabilitate them from crime much more difficult.
Early intervention will reduce crime and improve the chances of young people developing without the stigma of exposure to Legal processes.
Why do we have to wait until a young person is climbing the hierarchy of crime before any action is taken?
by CAA | Jul 5, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues, Youth
Remnants of the stolen car after Burwood fatality. Picture: Nine News/Today
It was a needless and shocking fatality, avoidable on a number of levels, and probably would have had more significant consequences had the thieves not taken a top-end car with all its advanced safety features to protect them, but not the innocent and hapless victim.
This needless loss of life is the direct consequence of a government ignoring advice, and unfortunately, the trajectory the government is on will only increase the risks, not mitigate them.
The government response was reported as:
A state government spokeswoman said what happened at Burwood was an unthinkable tragedy.
“Our thoughts are with the loved ones of the man who lost his life,” the spokeswoman said.
“Details about the incident are still being investigated and we are in close contact with Victoria Police. We are confident police will apprehend those who are still on the run as quickly as possible.”
She said Victoria had more police on the beat than any other state of territory and that the force targeted the worst young offenders, making 2700 arrests in the past year.
This statement attributed to a spokesperson is heartless and disrespectful to the victim and insulting to his family. We are not sure how the thoughts of the government can be with the Victim’s loved ones when they don’t even have the courtesy to use Ash Gordon’s name. However, the revelation in this statement should worry every Victorian when the spokesperson bragged of the 2700 arrests in the past year.
Again and again, this government ignores the simple concept of prevention, which is the only tried and proven way to stop this growing crime tsunami.
Arresting offenders is essential, but it will not reduce crime as the perpetrators are as inane as their actions. Still, they believe they won’t get caught, so the whole concept of deterrence is lost, exacerbated by the current judicial practices that obviously fail miserably to address the real issues.
The CAA has long argued that there are mechanisms that have been tried and worked in the past that could be reintroduced. A serious investment of money and resources into provocative policing is required to stem the tide.
The problem is set to become much worse as the government processes its latest effort, the Youth Justice Bill.
This 1100-page Bill that took five years to write doesn’t herald any innovation but is an extension of all the bad aspects of the current system. All the current flaws are further entrenched.
So, more of the same, only worse. More people will die, and more lives will be ruined, including devastating our young, because the government is focused on an unproven experimental concept, Restorative Justice, which nobody can indicate where this process has worked.
The government’s current and future strategies do not deal with diverting young people from crime.
Unbelievably, their new Youth Justice Bill regularly mentions diversion as one of its central planks. However, that is not a diversion from crime but from the legal system.
The two concepts are not mutually inclusive; they are different and seek different outcomes, which, in our view, are counterproductive objectives. Under the government’s new Bill, when a child commits multiple offences or a series of offences, there is no intervention or effort to have the child accept accountability or be subject to consequences. The Bill aims to put the child through a series of meetings and conferences, assuming that will solve the problem.
The recommendations of the CAA would have gone a long way to avoiding this tragic situation. See:
https://caainc.org.au/youth-crisis-a-solution/
https://caainc.org.au/crackdown-on-crime-the-wet-lettuce-leaf-approach/
https://caainc.org.au/you-cant-be-serious-premier/
A necessary and effective process of reducing the crime associated with cars is to ensure the vehicle, when stolen, can’t be used for the crook’s intended purpose. Take away their tools of trade; in this case, the stolen car, and the crime of Aggravated Burglary and car theft will plummet. Moreover, there are a raft of other serious crimes that stolen vehicles are currently used in commissioning; this initiative will curtail overall criminal activity. Crooks may have to resort to public transport or Uber.
An upgraded and relocated (within the vehicle) G-Tag could replace the E-Tag and perform that function to enable authorities to turn off the car, thwarting the crook’s ability to use the vehicle for criminal activity, including driving recklessly.
There will also be a perfect chance the car can be recovered intact, a blessing for those of the lower socio-economic strata, and the reduced losses of vehicles should reduce insurance premiums to benefit us all.
A number of cars already come with this capacity, and the owner can activate the disabling function; however, this assumes that the crooks didn’t take the victim’s phone and the victim is in a state to make sound decisions. Totally temporarily disabling the car at the wrong time could cause more significant risks to the community.
Imagine if a car was disabled at speed on a freeway without warning; this would cause carnage. With control of this resource by authorities, the vehicle could be monitored and disabled safely. With the owner having control, the consequences for their partner driving the car during a domestic dispute could have disastrous consequences. See:
https://caainc.org.au/?s=G-Tag
https://caainc.org.au/?s=The+G-tag
One problem the government has is being briefed by people who are not in touch with reality. The government was recently given a confidential briefing on youth-related matters only to have the staff from the Justice Department responsible for writing strategy for the government complain that the presentation was too graphic and stressful.
It is interesting how the victims of this crime may view this sensitivity, and it goes a long way to show that those drafting government policy are out of touch with the reality of the issues, perhaps living in a bubble of fantasy. Given some of their recent contributions, fantasy appropriately categorises their efforts. Unfortunately, the tragic death on Tuesday involving a stolen car is a portend of more to come. Lives are wasted by inaction. See:
https://caainc.org.au/woke-joke-meets-reality-shock/
It is fast heading in the direction that the only option for Victorians is to demonstrate against the Government’s direction as it is not only ruining people’s lives now living in fear but also ruining the lives of young Victorians coerced into crime.
The first action is to sign our petition at: https://caainc.org.au/petitions/
Then contact your local member of Parliament and make your views heard.
by CAA | Jun 22, 2024 | Current, Library, Youth
An article appeared in the Herald Sun on the 20th of June under the above heading and exposed the real and present dangers that Victorians face.
Crimes involving children as young as 10 years old have soared to their highest level since 2010 as alarming new figures reveal the state’s growing youth crime wave.
Children aged 14 to 17 years old were “over-represented” in burglaries, assaults, robberies and car thefts while almost 400 youth gang members were arrested within the past 12 months.
Baby-faced offenders aged 10 or 11 years old also recorded a 52.6 per cent spike in the number of offences committed.
More than a third of young criminals aged between 10 and 17 years old are repeat offenders, with the number of recidivist offenders rising by 10.4 per cent.
Children aged 10 to 13 years old were responsible for 84 aggravated burglaries across the state.
Five years ago, they had only been involved in 18.
These alarming figures are from the Crimes Statistics Agency Victoria, and apart from the danger these figures indicate, we are exposed to the more problematic fact that the Government is working hard to fan the flames of the issue, not resolve it.
More importantly, the government holds overall responsibility and is protecting ineptitude in the various arms of governments responsible for managing youth crime.
These must be held to account as much as the government.
The Courts
Daily, yet another juvenile responsible for atrocious crimes is being granted bail.
And given the Bail Act, it makes us wonder just what the judiciary is at.
The recent Bail Amendment Act 2023 (the Act), which commenced on 25 March 2024, made further changes to the Bail Act 1977, seeking to ensure bail laws protect the whole community and better target the use of remand for cases where it is necessary to prevent an unacceptable risk to community safety.- https://www.criminalsolicitorsmelbourne.com.au/blog/victorian-bail-law-reform
The Act is clear and applies standard English interpretations to the understanding of the Act’s purpose as amended; how do the courts circumnavigate this legislation, not occasionally but regularly, without apparent intervention by the government?
If the Attorney General does not provide leadership, the Director of Public Prosecutions must appeal some of these Court decisions.
What’s the good of having a government that produces a law that the courts ignore, suggesting they are not interested in subservience to the legislation?
It is our opinion that we are reaping the folly of the Restorative Justice fantasy forced on us as a solution to crime, but it has been an abject failure – just look at the crime statistics.
Why would any sane, reasonable person countenance any principles of that failed social experiment defies logic? And it is even more astounding that the judiciary could be seduced by this rubbish.
The Police
The Police do not help the whole issue.
The first point is that they need to stop making excuses that support the mindset that they can arrest their way out of the problem.
It took two decades to convert the Victoria Police Force under two visionary Chief Commissioners, Miller and Glare, from one predominantly reactive (as they are today) to a predominantly proactive force, particularly with youth.
The results were that crime by juveniles was not the epidemic it now is, and overall, crime declined as fewer juvenile offenders grew into adult offenders rather than managing and encouraging the juveniles into crime.
It took only one Chief Commissioner to destroy the effective direction of the force and three consecutive Chiefs, predominantly with a background of exclusive reactive federal police experience, to ensure the proactive approach was kept from developing, even though many operational police know the value of the proactive approach but gained no support as the police priority remains reactive.
The current Chief Commissioner has attempted to push back against the trend with limited success, as the crime statistics illustrate.
There is a major problem when you have an Acting Deputy Commissioner of Regional Operations, Brett Curran, quoted as saying, “A small group of hardened” young criminals were now committing severe and violent crimes more often.” (spin)
The following line says, ‘nearly 400 youth gang members have been arrested in the past 12 months.’ (fact)
Mr Curran also said, “Police arrested seven youth gang members, child thieves and car thieves every day during the past year.” (Spin)
That claim by Mr Curran equates to 2,555 youth gang member arrests, not nearly 400.
Indeed, some are arrested time and time again. Why? Because the courts are failing in their duty to the citizens of this state.
So much for the claim of a small number.
Victims would undoubtedly be impressed by the Deputies’ analysis (and maths) as they try to put their lives back together after an experience with the “small group”.
We wonder whether the Deputy who spent a considerable time out of policing as Daniel Andrew’s Chief of Staff has lost perspective.
As a Police executive, he has to learn not to use political spin he knew in his last job. The community sees straight through it and expects better from their Police leadership.
Department of Justice Youth Workers
Very little is said about their role or lack of success in the youth space, so we generally can only rely on the data, and by that measure, they have failed demonstrably.
They are referred to often in legislative discussions and are provided with powers to do their job. Still, there is something obviously and categorically wrong with the function of that government component.
These Youth workers aim to empower – young people in custody to steer their lives in a more positive direction when they return to the community”.
.- https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/youthjusticecareers
What a nonsensical function because the courts have demonstrated they are determined to have no juveniles of any age in custody. This supports the view that the courts wear this as a badge of honour and a demonstration that they are not subservient to the legislation. It is very dangerous and challenging to our democracy.
So, theoretically, those youth workers at the Department of Justice have little to do, as no juveniles are returning to the community; they never left.
Lifting the age of criminal responsibility
If a government were ever grossly tone-deaf, this issue is a classic. The age of criminal responsibility is planned to move from 10 to 14 years during a youth crime tsunami that the CAA warned was coming nine years ago. This has got to be the stupidest act any government has embarked upon in the crime space.
All this is based on is a feared notion that all children will end up in jail – which they don’t. Ideological nonsense is based on no empirical evidence.
This rubbish sways a government that wants to be taken seriously and is in denial of reality, a dangerous place for any government.
Moreover, children in this age bracket only ever get charged as distinct from being put in jail if they are not Doli Incapax, meaning incapable of forming criminal intent.
The question, therefore, is what to do with these miscreants, and that is a million-dollar question that all the “experts” advising the government on the bill have failed to resolve because no solution is offered.
The non-solution
The non-solution was reported as,
‘Police would still retain the power to intervene with younger offenders, including having the power to transport ten and 11-year-olds that find themselves in trouble with the law.’
The solution
The solution remains as elusive as it always has, and this legislation will not help, as it lacks a fundamental guiding principle for children and young people: accountability.
If children, or anybody, knows there are no consequences for criminal behaviour, then that’s what they will do, and they won’t change. Why would they if they enjoy it?
The problem is a lack of foresight and understanding of children and juveniles.
Children and Juveniles who play sports are less likely to commit offences, and the key is that sport has rules, and if the rules are disobeyed, there are consequences. That applies whether they are spectators or participants. Those youths who regularly attend school are also less likely to offend than those who don’t; again, rules with consequences.
Most people of all ages live within society’s rules; if they digress, there are consequences.
A significant contributor by a long measure to our present youth crisis is that for criminal behaviour, there are no consequences if you break the rules.
The issue of incarceration of children has been the primary driver for this reform, based on the emotive argument ‘you can’t put children in jail’, but the problem is being viewed from the wrong perspective.
The reform must encompass the principle of consequences, as all the other approaches are ineffective.
Rather than demonise the broad ‘jail’ concept, we should look at how it can positively affect young people.
We have long advocated that the justice system is too afraid to deal with the crisis of putting a child in jail, and often, that is not serving the interest of the juvenile or child.
One of the current flaws is that the judiciary views young offenders when considering penalties from an adult perspective.
Young people have a different perspective of time than adults, and a week or so in detention, where they gain privileges by compliance, will have a marked positive impact on them.
Young people respond exceptionally well to rules as they offer some solace and security; however, if they have never been taught discipline and breaking rules has consequences, it doesn’t work.
We are not talking about traditional views of jail but of securing the young person without privileges for weeks, not years. Their behaviour dictates the time they are in secure accommodation, not the judiciary. As much as the judiciary thinks they know how a child will respond, they don’t because they are not there with the child 24/7.
There are significant omissions in the proposed Youth Justice Bill currently before Parliament.
The most significant omission in the Bill
As much as the parents of these miscreants (if they have any) are criticised for lack of action, the Bill does nothing to elevate the role of the parents or guardians.
Yes, there are hopeless parents responsible for troubled children, but the vast majority try; many try but are judged poorly, and there is no provision to help upskill parents, and they have all but been omitted from this Bill. They have an essential role to play in reinforcing other initiatives.
Home detention
Supported by electronic monitoring, home detention should be the first option for any child convicted of an offence. Children do not understand ‘Orders’, and the other plethora of titles bandied about in the Courtroom.
Many need to understand that if they walk out after a court hearing unpenalized after a hearing, they haven’t necessarily beaten the charges, and their bragging rights within their cohort are worthless.
The new sophisticated Electronic Monitoring (EM) devices can fix a virtual perimeter for the child to live within, while providing for their education, sports and other essential family functions.
The EM device can alert a parent their child is leaving the house, breaching physical or social media curfew rather than finding they are gone the following day. Home detention means they cannot exercise their free will outside boundaries, and the EM gives the parents the tools they need to enforce it.
Use of their social media devices also needs to be controlled, and privileges gained by good behaviour and compliance to the rules, allowing more access.
The length of time that the child is in home detention should be based on the child’s or youth’s behavioural improvement.
Home detention is a very cost-effective way to manage miscreant children and divert them out of their criminal behavioural cycle.
Although we won’t hold our breath, maybe the enlightened members of parliament will see this legislation for what it is: a half-baked hotchpotch of ideological one-liners masquerading as legislation for the betterment of the State and its children.
There indeed are flaws in the current system, and they should be fixed rather than embarking on an untried excursion. Fix it; don’t replace it with thousands of pages of convoluted rubbish that will only hurt our most vulnerable children.
Inevitably, this legislation will leave vulnerable children at further risk, will do nothing to prevent more victims from being traumatised and will further impede effective policing.
An urgent community-based examination of a better way forward might lead to a real improvement in our juvenile justice system.
Simply raising the age of criminal culpability will have the effect of increasing crime as there are no barriers to young people offending.
by CAA | Jun 19, 2024 | Library, Uncategorized
As reported in the Age on the 18th of June ’24, New South Wales is leading Australia in meaningful action to reduce the burgeoning rate of death and assaults from Domestic Violence.
Premier Chris Minns, on the 14th of May, announced that Electronic Monitoring (EM), or ankle bracelets, will be introduced to perpetrators bailed.
Today, the 19th of June, West Australian Premier Roger Cook announced measures similar to those in NSW but much more comprehensive.
In the West, about 550 family and domestic violence perpetrators will be forced to wear ankle bracelets with the introduction of new laws to track and monitor high-risk perpetrators in the community.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/western-australia/one-aussie-state-will-force-dv-thugs-to-wear-ankle-bracelets-so-highrisk-offenders-can-be-monitored-in-the-community/news-story/d97915951872826bf60ef09e1a61d671
The Apple Isle Tasmania has been using these devices since 2018 to manage Domestic Violence perpetrators with a high degree of success.
And while Victoria drags its feet on yet another initiative that will save lives, Domestic Violence victims are needlessly dying, being injured or living in self-imposed purgatory to try to keep safe.
This paper shows how victims and their families can achieve dignity and self-worth free from danger.
Based on the current research, nearly 70% of perpetrators who kill their partners have one thing in common – they all had interaction with the legal system before they committed the murder.
That means the courts are a major contributor to the system’s failure.
Premier Minns has taken the first steps with mandatory EM Monitoring as a condition of Bail. Still, the court hearing may be months or years away, so the EM intervention must be immediately after the incident or when the Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) is served.
In one case, we are aware that the perpetrator has avoided court for five years by seeking adjournments, so in NSW, he would avoid EM, and the victim continues to live in fear for the life of her family and self.
More than three out of five of the killers (68 per cent) had a prior engagement with police, 65 per cent had “prior engagement in a legal setting”, and 65 per cent had previous convictions for a criminal offence. Thirty-four per cent had prior convictions for family violence.
Police must be given the power to apply EM.
Given the statistical data, police are unlikely to get the use of EM wrong, but if they do, the issue can be resolved at the perpetrator’s first bail/adjournment hearing.
Modern technology solutions have been available for some time. However, timid politicians are more concerned about offending their perceived electoral sensitivities rather than protecting victims; perhaps they see them as unavoidable collateral damage.
A proper dispassionate interpretation of what the research tells us is that the likelihood of death or serious injury to domestic victims can be dramatically cut by using EM.
The EM must also be part of the Police Family Violence Safety Notice (FVSN).
If the Police have the power and see the need to issue an FVSN, then they should be able to implement the use of EM as part of that notice to ensure compliance and protect the victim during the period of heightened risk.
It is noteworthy that the data available to courts is the same as that available to the Police at the scene, with police having the advantage of seeing the demeanour of the parties at a time of stress, making their judgement far more informed than when the parties appear in the emotionally neutral court.
Police using this power can have their decisions overturned by a court, as an FVSN is also, in effect, a summons, and that is the proper place to test the evidence of the need for the ongoing EM compliance device.
The advantage is that the courts will no longer need to make orders for EM; they will need only to evaluate the extension. There would need to be compelling evidence for a court to order the device removed, and the court would need to be well satisfied that the judgement of the police who attended the scene was grossly misguided.
To get an accurate snapshot of just how significant the problem of Domestic Incidents is, the Crime Statistics Agency has produced some potent figures at,
https://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/crime-statistics/latest-victorian-crime-data/family-incidents-2
More victims will die, and many more will be traumatised and living in constant fear as the government fails and meekly continues to accumulate blood on its hands instead of taking decisive action.
The government must get its act together and implement EM for persons issued with an FVSN by the Police as a matter of urgency.
The infrastructure, resources and technical knowledge are already well-established in the private sector and would be able to respond in short order; police training in their role in the process is minimal as the service provider looks after all technical aspects, including responses to fitting, servicing or adjusting the devices in the field as well as monitoring the devices 24/7 advising police (according to a Police protocol), of any breaches to the conditions imposed on that device.
There are no excuses for not establishing this initiative and using the private sector as a government response to establish or expand the ability to deal with this. In the best, most optimistic scenario, it will take 4-5 years.
Time the victims don’t have.
by CAA | Jun 16, 2024 | Library, Youth
The CAA at least supports and acknowledges that the Government is trying to address the Youth Crime issue, but their approach has intrigued us.
It is obvious that those advising the government are so far off the mark that they make these new government approaches to juvenile crime almost laughable.
Unbelievably, this legislation has taken five years to develop, and it ends up something as inane as this.
The proposed changes to the relevant laws will not have any meaningful impact because they are designed to appease, not provide a solution.
The major flaw is how the juveniles who are the perpetrators react because that is critical to the success or otherwise.
In general, there will be no reaction because they will ignore any changes even if they hear about them, and that is highly problematic. They will not alter their behaviour if they even hear about it, and much less understand what these changes mean. As unrealistic as it may seem, youths commit crimes believing they won’t get caught, so sabre rattling at Spring Street is about as useless as hip pockets in underwear.
Let’s take a realistic look at the proposed changes,
- Recruiting children for crime.
Once a child has entered into crime, their mentors are to them demi-gods, and the last thing they would do is cooperate in bringing them down. The drug scene is renowned for the loyalty users have to their dealers, and users rarely dob them in. The closest authorities get is that the perpetrator’s best mate is probably their dealer, but proving it is nigh on impossible.
The 10-year penalty only applies if recruiters are caught; given the understanding of most offenders, this will have no deterrent effect.
Contrary to popular belief, the recruiters are not some giant ogre, but most probably, they are the same or similar age to the juvenile being recruited. The age disparity of the young means that twelve months could have a substantial impact on the aspirations of the younger juvenile.
- Using intensive supervision orders.
Empowering the Courts to apply intensive supervision orders is also next to useless because the perpetrators will not modify their ways, as being issued with that order has several flaws.
The child will generally have no idea what it means, and in their minds, they have beaten the charges (bragging rights). That occurs every time a child appears before a Court for a crime and walks out the door afterwards; irrespective of the outcome of their hearing, they have beaten it, they are free.
If Youth justice workers were effective, we would not be in the crisis we now face, so having them play a part in this space will only exacerbate the issue, and the problem will continue to escalate. History shows that there are never enough youth workers to effectively monitor young offenders.
Consider how often juvenile offenders now breach bail – another court order.
- Youth Justice workers gaining judicial powers.
According to the media report, the legislation allows youth justice workers to exercise judicial power by deciding if and when a child might need to be electronically monitored (an ankle bracelet).
There are several critical failures in this approach.
Allowing youth justice workers to exercise judicial discretion in this manner will guarantee that the EM will never be used, as it is contrary to the ethos of youth workers.
Most significantly, it allows unqualified (in the area of Law) persons to make decisions that alter the conditions of a court-imposed Bail, effectively overruling a court’s decision.
This undermines the Justice system, and the power must never be granted.
Inevitably, this power will be sought by all Youth workers simply by adding Justice to their title, as is already the case.
A cursory search reveals no less than six occasions where the term Justice is used in their title or job description, but they are not part of the Justice Department. The courts are the rightful place to adjudicate matters such as bail conditions, and the Courts must not be undermined.
This must be non-negotiable.
No matter how well they may be intentioned, it is simply not a Youth workers role.
It is highly probable that the Youth Justice workers would not be capable of effectively applying the necessary restrictions to enable the child to have reasonable freedom but sufficient to achieve compliance with their bail conditions.
It is not simply putting on an EM and monitoring it; many technical aspects of its operation are necessary to be effective, and that involves determining the conditions/locations that the child will observe. We note that their parents are not even worth mentioning, and irrespective of their parenting skills, this is very sad.
The system must have integrity and accountability for the opportunity for Natural Justice to be applied to any change in bail conditions imposed by a Court. The victims and the perpetrator (and, critically, the perpetrator’s parents) must be able to input into the monitoring parameters. The courts are the final arbitrators to determine the parameters and conditions of the use of EM, the opportunity to exist for decisions to be tested, and the final application to be capable of review.
It should not be up to the worker or, for example, the police as they are intimately involved, but in the child’s best interest, the decisions have to be made on the evidence by a dispassionate court.
The approach proposed is not in the best interest of the child.
- Intensive supervision orders
The name implies something so open-ended that it can prove useless to influencing the average 10 to18-year-old hell-bent on the thrill of their criminal endeavours.
If they ignore the bail conditions they already have, then the ‘Intense’ order will also be ignored; to children, it is just a word.
Youth workers and police will spend all their time tracking down the miscreants and taking them before the court to be re-released. The impact of reducing crime will be nil.
If a child misbehaves and requires upgraded supervision, they must be controlled by electronic monitoring.
- Transferring prisoners 18-21 to adult prisons.
This significant announcement is totally unnecessary and no more than political spin.
The adult Parole Board has, for a long time, had those powers. https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/parole-process/youth-justice-transfers.
There may be a need for minor amendments to the CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES ACT 2005
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/cyafa2005252/
But the power already exists and properly is a matter for the Courts, not some bureaucratic whim.
- Raising the age of criminal responsibility.
We have previously raised the stupidity of this move on many occasions as it will lead to more younger children being involved in crime, recruited at a younger and more impressionable age.
The idiots who proffer this notion that young children end up in jail have no contact with reality.
How often are juveniles jailed? Practically never.
We do not argue that children should be jailed; however, where the circumstances are required, a short term (weeks, not months) would be appropriate not only to protect the community but also to protect the children from themselves and achieve Court compliance.
Threats of jail are of no value unless the threats are followed through.
It was very recently that a child in this age category committed murder but was not prosecuted, as many children who commit serious crimes are not because the threshold of the child’s understanding to meet the level of intent required before a prosecution can proceed. The system generally was working fine, so why the need to fiddle with it, mainly as it will not reduce crime but exacerbate it.
The energy of those pushing this agenda should be redirected to something useful, like developing effective strategies to avoid children committing crimes in the first place. A novel idea.
Police would still retain the power, including having the power to transport 10 to and 11-year-olds who find themselves in trouble with the law.
The picture being painted is that this age group are too young to be prosecuted, so what do the police do with them when they are transported?
Take them out for a Maccas to reward their behaviour.
Somebody is telling porkies about juvenile crime rates, but the true picture is available at https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/fresh-spike-in-youth-crime-latest-police-statistics-show/
“This would ensure the state’s youngest offenders aren’t given free rein to offend.” A statement attributed to a senior government source.
They can’t be serious or that naive, but they are. Heaven help us.
These changes took five years to develop, reflecting poorly on the government and its capabilities. In five years, and this is the best they can come up with? Heads must roll.
It will be up to the public in two years to decide the value of this strategy, and in our view, there will be no tangible improvement in the situation from this scheme, which might be reflected in the ballot box.
We are just going to have to grow many more lettuces.
by CAA | Jun 6, 2024 | Library, Victoria Police Issues
“Just 58 per cent of those surveyed said they were ‘satisfied with policing services’, a massive fall from 73.1 per cent from the year before.” – HS 6th June ’24.
As indicated by our chairman, former Chief Commissioner Kel Glare, the issues stem from the inconsistency and, in our view, a poor police response to COVID-19. Still, some solutions can be implemented if the organisation is serious about lifting the community’s confidence, which should be a given.
The Victoria Police response was,
“the drop in public confidence is due to the survey being carried out online.”
The community is not looking for excuses; they are looking for action.
Puerile, ‘the dog ate my homework’ type excuses exacerbate, not diminish, community feelings. It’s time to step up and address the issues at hand.
Perhaps VicPol would be better off looking outside their management bubble to determine and implement solutions that may give the public confidence in their Force.
Here are a few suggestions,
- Review the CAA 100.3 https://caainc.org.au/?s=Plan+100.3&doing_wp_cron=1717636142.282346010
- Make policing at the community level the force priority over everything else,
- Re-prioritise Proactive policing as the force’s main activity.
- Undertake an extensive review of upgrading and modernising policies to be fit for purpose.
- Review urgently upgrading policies. A senior officer sneezes, and the repercussions are felt at the coal face as the upgrading practices push up members to fill the gap. Creating specialist relieving positions at all levels is cheaper and more efficient.
- Create a Force Reserve following the Military model. Releasing hundreds of members for general operational duties.
- Introduce KPIs for all ranks above Constable, which are reviewed monthly and compared against actual performance. Failure to adjust should instigate sanctions. Hard-working Police should not have to carry poor performers.
- Review all apparent Service Delivery initiatives to identify those that are Service Efficiency, not Service Delivery, and when the two collide, Service Delivery must prevail.
- Review the number of Executive positions as cost savings in that area can be reallocated to the frontline. Many have been created without a business case to justify the position.
- Reintroduce the intermediate officer ranks to provide more significant operational support, freeing up inspectors to actively provide leadership in the field. This can be done at little to no cost by not increasing the Officer ranks numerically but by realigning existing Officers.
- Review recruiting processes to avoid applicants waiting excessively for results and call-ups. At a time when numbers are down, creative measures are required to train more recruits, and if that means introducing shift work during training, so be it; trainees need to adjust to shift work immediately after they graduate anyway.
- Take a Force stance on the introduction of Electronic Monitoring of perpetrators to reduce police demand and achieve greater compliance, particularly in the area of Domestic Violence and Juvenile recidivist management.
- Ensure that the 50,000-eye road watch is implemented as an urgent initiative to reduce road tolls. https://caainc.org.au/50,000-eyes-road-watch/.
- Ring fence the Highway patrol so they can concentrate on the Road toll and not be purloined for other extraneous police duties.
- Take a leadership role in public issues like drugs and other community issues. This is not to encourage the Force bleating on these issues from one political side or the other of any public discourse but rather purely on the facts and the practicalities police face.
- Police should take a strong victim-centric stand and support the implementation of reparation as a Force policy.
- Additionally, the Force should also adopt a policy of not supporting plea bargains in all prosecutions undertaken by the Force. A criminal charged with an offence should not be something that can be traded away for convenience. The guilt or innocence of that particular matter can only be determined by the Court.
- Ensure the Force responds to all groups potentially intent on disrupting public order in an even-handed way. https://caainc.org.au/police-pride-march-a-valuable-lesson/
- Urgently review the uniform dress code, ensuring members wearing mufti hybrid with police paraphernalia revert to the uniform. If the uniform is not fit for purpose, modify the uniform. Emulating American Special Forces is churlish and dangerous. If there are legitimate reasons for plain clothes, all weapons, etc, must not be visible to the general public. permission should only be given on a case-by-case basis. When Special duties and the like, move around in uniform rather than mufti, they increase the visible Police presence an imperative to build community confidence.
Victoria Police is an independent entity and must be free from the ideological pressure of the politicians of the day. It can and should provide leadership on social issues based on the facts.
Moving the Force priority to the frontline uniformed specialist general Police locally, impacteing their resourcesas an absolute last resort will go a long way to improving public confidence in Police. If additional police are required for specific events, the resources must be drawn from non-operational areas.
That a swathe of non-operational Police are taken from their tasks for a day will have little long-term impact, but removing operational vehicles from their patrols can devastate service delivery to the community, which should be the priority.
The Chief Commissioner once said words to the effect that recruits break their neck to get into uniform and, after four years, apply the same rigour to get out of it.
Our response is that force management has to apply itself to creating creative initiatives to stop this phenomenon, as these factors bleed the frontline from experience and expertise where they are most needed. These members are the Force’s leading and most important resource.
Above all else, the community wants you to be there, even when they don’t need you, as the reassurance is invaluable and coincidentally helps prevent crime and disorder.
Deal with the issues before they manifest rather than picking up the pieces later.
