There is no argument, based on fact, that we are winning the war on drugs. But, if winning or losing was adjudged, we are losing and being smashed.
The benefit of the millions of dollars applied to the supply side of the illicit drug trade can only be described as relatively ineffective on any cost-benefit analysis. Equally, there is no effective broad-based proactive strategy to address the issue of users, the demand side.
Huge drug busts should not be the measure of success for law enforcement because, at best, it causes some disruption. But, as one commentator quipped recently, syndicates allow in their business model for law enforcement to have some success and be ripped off by other criminals. Still, the vast profits make this risk worthwhile.
We do not suggest targeting criminal importation of illicit drugs be rewound. However, to make the war on drugs deliver some impact on the illegal trade, we need to attack not only the product but the hearts and minds of users and potential users, and that is the demand side of the equation.
With reduced demand, the supply will ultimately shrink after initially creating an increased oversupply. As a result, the oversupplied product is harder to offload, forcing prices down, and the level of crime to maintain a habit fades.
Although we are not naive enough to suggest a strategy addressing the demand side would eliminate the drug trade, it will not, but combined with the attacks on the supply side, it is likely to markedly reduce the number of users and, to a degree, mitigate the problem The mitigation will be in direct proportion to the application of strategies aimed at the demand side.
Most current resources applied to the demand side are generally targeted at those entering or about to enter the criminal justice system. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that there is any effective intervention before this. When users enter the Justice system, the chances of an effective diversion are severely diminished; it is too late for many.
The CAA believes that a strategy that involves early intervention is far more likely to be effective than waiting for the problem to manifest substantially.
The strategy.
We have come to accept that Quarantine is a very effective way to control contagions in the community. Illicit drugs arguably kill more Australians than during the COVID Pandemic. We accept Quarantine for that lesser evil, so why not apply the same principles to Illicit Drugs, creating drug Quarantine facilities?
Populating a drug quarantine facility.
Anybody suspected of being under the influence or adjudged by Police or a medical practitioner on reasonable grounds to have ingested illicit drugs and a drug test on-site returns a positive, these people can, by Health Order, be immediately placed in Quarantine.
What might a Drug quarantine facility look like?
A secure place where users can be medically assessed and held on a Health Order for up to fourteen days while they are evaluated and their health adjusted before being released back into society or the legal system.
The first function of the facility is to conduct a clinical assessment to confirm the presence of illicit drugs. A person found not to be under the influence of drugs must be immediately released from the facility after advising the Police if other Judicial obligations exist.
During this period, experts can work with the person to guide them to deal with dependency or other health issues. They can access support if required and have them return to society in a better condition than they were, armed with how to escape their addiction and/or lifestyle changes to remove the necessity of drugs before becoming addicted.
Taking drug-affected people away from Hospital Emergency Rooms and off the streets must be one of the great positives of this strategy.
We would argue that there is no reasonable opportunity for clinicians or others working in the shooting gallery environment to have any user interaction with the addicts. Because there are none, the shooting gallery, falsely labelled a safe injecting room, is a drug facilitation facility.
Users arrive desperate for their fix and leave on a high, so the argument that prevention work is carried out is a myth. That is why the most important statistic that these facilities will not publish is the number of addicts diverted from their addiction.
An addict or drug user in Quarantine would be absolutely focused on clinicians making medical intervention far more effective because of the nature of the facility.
What of the mechanics of this proposal?
A Drug Quarantine facility will need to be as secure as any other Quarantine facility with some added safeguards specific to the purpose.
The concept is to have strong security by a suitable agency and inside managed by Health professionals.
A drug-affected person who has allegedly committed a serious crime and is under the influence of drugs when arrested can be sent to the facility and be transferred back to the criminal justice system on the expiration of the fourteen days for Justice processing.
It would be reasonable to presume that an alleged perpetrator will be much better able to deal with any criminal matters being as healthy as can be achieved in fourteen days.
Where will they be located?
Drug quarantine facilities can be housed in the now redundant properties and buildings secured for the COVID pandemic. Repurposing these resources would be sensible and supported by all Victorians. The attraction of this approach would give Victoria a resource never before enjoyed should a wide-ranging pandemic ever eventuate in the future. The Drug quarantine facilities can be repurposed back for the duration of any new challenges. Short-term interruptions to the Drug service would have little meaningful impact on the Drug patient as their stay in the facilities are only short-term.
What benefits of this approach?
There would be a number of positives cascading from this initiative; we have listed a few.
The significant and first impact will be on reducing drivers on our roads that use drugs and the lives saved. The effect community-wide will be almost immediate, and the deterrent effect profound.
Illicit drugs impact domestic violence, and removing a drug-affected perpetrator from a violent domestic situation is a very positive capability that can also save lives.
Drug users, particularly in their early foray into the scene, will be discouraged from further involvement.
The drug scene will be driven underground, a real positive, to keep it away from our kids. Anything that makes drugs more difficult to obtain is a positive, as necessary as being socially derided.
An addict may find that returning to the quarantine process as a repeat user may be the catalyst to encourage the person to seek a way out from their addiction, creating the motivation necessary to break the addiction.
The stigma attached to the Quarantine facility will also be a substantial deterrent to would-be users. But, on the other hand, time out in the facility may be the early intervention that stops the cycle of rampant addiction.
It is unlikely that Police would proceed with any criminal matters on the lower end of the criminal scale on users quarantined, exercising discretion and preventing many from entering the Justice system, consequently reducing court caseloads.
Importantly, the maintenance and access to quality data for research purposes would start to achieve data that can be relied upon as the depth and demographic associated with the problem become evident to allow the development of more targeted approaches.
Why will Quarantine work?
Will Quarantine move all away from drugs? No, but the impact on their health and giving them a hiatus in their lifestyle might just have the desired effect for many. After fourteen days, they will have lost their position in the drug empire, so they will have to start again. Disruption can sometimes be more effective than the current options and should never be underestimated as a counter to an illegal problem.
Identifying and removing trigger points for addicts over fourteen days would act as step one to recovery, and with the trigger points identified, it can be the start of a way out.
Rehabilitation
We accept the arguments for rehabilitation and the lack of resources available to addicts; there does need to be an increase in these resources; however, pouring buckets of money into the rehabilitation of addicts will not solve the problem per se. The nirvana of a rehab centre on every corner would add to the problem, not diminish it, with the same impact as safe injecting rooms. They both play as a positive in the drug Marketing mix, not a negative, as should be the case.
The consequences of no action
The community is only too aware that community leaders’ efforts to manage the drug issue have failed abysmally. There are no forward-thinking strategies that we know of, to overcome, or at the very least, achieve a reduction in the problem.
More Safe Injecting Rooms means more addicts and growth in the drug industry.
Make no mistake, the explosion of Safe Injecting Rooms is seen as a pathway by some towards the legalisation of Illicit drugs; it is merely step one.
Separation of legal and health issues.
We must accept that while illicit drugs are a legal issue, addiction is a health one, and the separation needs to be understood.
Incarceration within the Justice system and given the innate ability of individuals to be innovative to satisfy human needs (including needs not listed in Maslow’s theory), we are not particularly confident that being in jail will necessarily mean no access to drugs.
While we strongly advocate the health aspect as essential to address, the criminal aspect must not be ignored.
Drug addicts do not commit a crime in some involuntary state, they may have strong urges to satisfy their addiction, but the offence is only the method to access the drugs. They are entirely cognisant that their actions are criminal. Often the crimes require planning, and that is not the actions of an addict in some involuntary state.
As we separate the health and the crime issues, the courts must separate the addiction from the offence.
If a person commits a crime to service an addiction, the addiction should be irrelevant to any penalty. Deriving some benefit to penalty before the Courts because of an addiction to an illegal substance is in our view, objectionable.
Legalising/ decriminalisation of illicit Drugs
That is the holy grail for the drug industry and all the drug apologists who generally imbibe but do not want the hassle of potential criminal sanctions.
This is particularly an attitude amongst many elites who enjoy risk-taking but hold down very responsible executive positions.
Make no mistake, we are on the path to Legalising Illicit drugs. The strategy of creeping assumptions is well developed, with the end game not far away.
It started with the safe injecting Rooms. The legalisation of prostitution and now working groups looking at the of legalising drugs. We know what they will find and there will be little doubt that attempts to ram through legislation on this matter is nigh.
The working groups are looking at the how-to, not the why.
It’s not just Quarantine as the solution.
A Quarantine program is but one part of the strategy; the other is public awareness campaigns. The Quit campaign that altered community standards is a standout, but in this case, targeting the young to make drugs socially unacceptable in that cohort would be imperative. Take the ‘Cool‘ out of drugs.
Recent research suggests thirty lives per year, plus countless injuries, involve drug-affected drivers.
The acting Police Minster Ben Carroll, referring to drugged drivers, was recently quoted as saying, “Any measure on our roads to save lives is worth taking”, and he is absolutely right. However, we need a new direction because what has been done to date has been a failure.
It is common knowledge amongst particularly young drivers that consuming alcohol and driving is too risky, but party drugs are undetectable (the integrity of this statement is questionable, in fact). So, they use drugs in lieu of alcohol with all the added risks—particularly the long-lasting effect of days, not hours.
The prospect of 14 days of Quarantine if a driver is detected with drugs would dramatically reduce the Drug Driver problem overnight.
What of the other issues?
This paper does not address the myriad of detail required to implement this proposal but proposes a concept that can be developed into reality in a relatively short time frame.
The quarantine approach to Illicit drugs is new and innovative and, most importantly, infinitely measurable.
Victoria can become a world leader in this field by applying a commitment towards a solution for the illicit drug problem.
It is convenient that the government has two options currently available to implement the program by repurposing two Government facilities, the Quarantine facility at Mickleham and the Yooralla Building in the CBD.
Repurposing both facilities would receive strong community support and have almost an immediate impact.
Upper House Nick McGowen’s comments regarding drivers using headlights during the day caught my attention recently. HS 1st of June 2023, A Bright Idea.
In the 1970s, while stationed at Seymour Highway Patrol, I often found myself from time to time, losing sight of oncoming vehicles or those waiting to turn onto the highway. All be it for a slit second, but long enough for it to be potentially dangerous, particularly at dawn, dusk, and variable weather conditions. This was especially dangerous for catching-speeding motorists, as high-speed driving was commonplace, and that facilitated constant high-speed driving for enforcement.
I was ridiculed by my superiors when I suggested that drivers should use their parking lights while driving. I was even directed not to use them in police vehicles.
Interestingly, I could not find any regulation that prohibited driving with headlights during the day.
MP Nick McGowan’s proposal to require all drivers to activate their headlights during the day is a sensible measure that should be supported by all politicians. This simple initiative can significantly improve visibility on the country as well as metropolitan roads, particularly in areas with shadows and variable conditions. However, drivers of vehicles without daytime running lights should be required to use their parking lights.
Aftermarket daytime driving lights are available for less than $100 and are easy to install without the need for a specialist auto electrical service. Therefore, it is reasonable to require vehicles that need a Certificate of Roadworthiness to be fitted with these lights.
While I support this initiative wholeheartedly, it saddens me that it could have saved hundreds of Victorian lives if it had been introduced in the 70s.
The lesson here is that our legislators should not dismiss ideas simply because they cannot see their value; sometimes, the visions of others are critical.
In the Herald Sun of 25/05/2023, there is an article referring to the charging of a former Police Sergeant, Mark Sims, with Misconduct in Public Office and other offences for writing a message on a whiteboard at Kyneton Police Station in November 2020, “beware of the rats”.
Ultimately the charge of Misconduct in Public Office was withdrawn, and the only remaining charge was dealt with when Sims admitted to a single charge of causing disaffection among police officers.
While in no way condoning the actions of Sims, the fact of Sims being charged with Misconduct in Public Office is a cause for concern.
Over the past eight years, the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc.(CAA) has continually referred to actions of members of the Government that, in our view, clearly constitute Misconduct in Public Office only to hear that this offence was too difficult to prove for charges to be laid.
If writing “beware of the rats” on a police station whiteboard was considered sufficiently serious for the laying of a Misconduct in Public Offence charge, how is it that no politician has been similarly charged?
Incidents warranting such a charge range from the notorious Red Shirts Rort to the treatment of Ian Cook and ICook Foods, with many instances in between. In particular, the issue surrounding the Quarantine debacle, which allegedly resulted in the death of over eight hundred people. Nobody was held accountable, let alone charged with any offence.
Clearly, double standards are being applied. Those authorities who have repeatedly failed in their duty to the public to hold politicians and Public Officers to account should themselves be considered to have committed Misconduct in Public Office.
For how long are we expected to tolerate these double standards?
Recently The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) emailed a letter to you relating to the North Richmond, so called, Safe Injecting Room pointing out the utterly inappropriate siting of such a facility. We requested you to use your power to prevent the continuing sacrificing of the physical and psychological health of children who live near that facility and who attend the nearby school.
A majority of you opted to ignore our plea and have passed legislation ensuring that the well-being of children will continue to be sacrificed to the needs of drug addicts. For this, those who voted to pass this legislation ought to be thoroughly ashamed.
The CAA implores you to reconsider this barbarous act and repeal this cruel legislation, and, if such a facility is to be continued, choose a site where children and local residents are not so adversely impacted on a daily basis.
Would you have your children, if any, raised next to an Injecting Room? If you answer honestly, your answer would be a resounding no.
If you voted against the permanent continuance of the Injecting Room at the North Richmond site, we congratulate you. If you voted for the continuance, we utterly deplore your inhumanity in continuing to sacrifice children in 2023 and beyond.
The CAA will continue to do all it can to protect the rights of affected children and local residents.
(It should be noted the CAA has proposed a much better health related approach to dealing with drug addiction.)
What a brilliant idea; why didn’t we think of this earlier?
Kids desensitised to and normalised to drugs, by the drug room just opposite their school in Nth Richmond, and the playgound to dangerous to use, will be able to call in and get a hit on the way home.
Mum can wait outside the injecting room rather than at the school gate.
It took the Green’s Aiv Puglielli to come up with this ridiculous and inane idea. He claims to have ‘expert health advice’. We note that it is not necessarily ‘Medical Advice’; it is more likely that advice would have originated from the drug industry to expand their market.
Mr Puglielli should have stuck to the Arts, where he has a background and left these issues to people that know something about it.
We would question the bona fides of the Greens’ advisers, and you can guarantee they will never raise their heads above the parapet to expose themselves to deserved ridicule.
How ridiculous to even suggest that a child can attend a drug room to shoot up. Is it to be an after-school activity, or will it be introduced as part of the curriculum?
Under this proposal, the Doctors’ Hippocratic Oath would be invoked, and the identity of the child would not be disclosed even to the child’s parents.
If these loopy ideas gain any traction, they will turn our parliamentary system into a joke, and what remaining credibility the parliament has will be lost, a loss it may never recover from.
We have long suspected that some drug apologists are linked to the drug trade and have been corrupted to push pro-drug policies. The rivers of gold that flow in the industry leads inevitably to corruption.
If there is any hope, politicians, irrespective of their ideology, must rise up and call this rubbish for what it is.
This is one of the very few occasions where politicians must put aside ideology for the greater good and regain respect for the political institution.
The State Government appears to be on the fringe of introducing a “safe” drug injecting room (“drug house”) in the CBD. Originally proposed next to Victoria Market (initially supported by Lord Mayor Sally Capp) and now apparently proposed at or near Flinders Street Station. If this occurs, it will become the greatest folly the MCC has introduced to the CBD. An own goal that could ruin the CBD for decades. Indeed the term “safe” in the context of drugs is an oxymoron. Illegal drugs are not safe! The place where you take them may be safe, but that is all. Taking illicit drugs is unsafe (otherwise make them legal), the environment around the place where the user takes them is unsafe… as a result of drug dealers (who will come to sell drugs to the users), criminals of various types hanging around to steal from the users, residents and dealers, the consequential health issues attached to the user and the consequential behaviour of the user which is often threatening to bystanders and emergency services who inevitably have to look after them.
The model for this drug house is one now operating in Richmond. Readers should note on its website: “Once registration and assessment are complete…They wash their hands, are provided with sterile injecting equipment and are given harm reduction advice before they inject their pre-obtained drugs in an allocated booth.” What an invitation for drug dealers to hang around and sell their wares! Users get their drugs elsewhere and where better from next to where you inject. One of the arguments for establishing the drug house is that it saves lives. Rubbish! But there have still been almost 7000 drug-related deaths since being established. Criminals hang out around the centre, break-ins to local residences have increased, and prostitutes are plying their trade in the nearby parks and streets.
The Richmond Drug Centre is attached to a community health centre next to a primary school. Residents nearby have complained of rising drug use and crime. This paper has recently highlighted residents’ concerns which have been brushed over.
The MCC and the State have sat on a report by former Chief Commissioner of Police Ken Ley for many months that apparently supports a drug house. This report appears to have been withheld by the Lord Mayor and Councillors prior to last year’s State election. Why? We do not know. But if it exists, the public and ratepayers have a right to see it. Businesses (especially those near the proposed drug house, need to prepare and not be ill-informed should they need to make decisions about improvements, renewing a lease or buying a property.
Drug use is a major social issue, and that users need to be looked after is not the issue. The issue is how you deal with it, and the only way to do so responsibly is through an integrated drug user strategy. One that treats the user’s immediate health issues sets up a rehabilitation treatment program and gets them off the streets and into safe accommodation. This should be a state lead initiative that has been wanting for decades. It is tough love, but in the end, best for the user and the overall community.
The Community Advocacy Alliance, made up of respected police veterans, says: “Injecting Rooms are neither safe for the addicts nor the community, no matter where you put them, as they do not even rate as a band-aid to the issue. It is even questionable that they save lives.”
They go on to say: “The CAA believes the solution will be based on proactive intervention, law enforcement (not passive avoidance) along with appropriate rehabilitative infrastructure.
The use of Health Orders to place addicts or users in a secure medical facility so that their overall health can be attended to…is the key.”
This is common sense, and the MCC will lead Melbourne into a social and economic abyss if it continues to proceed with setting up a drug house in the CBD. Melbourne contributes a substantial proportion of the nation’s GDP. It serves as a gateway for international trade and investment. Allowing a drug house and the associated criminal activity in the CBD will:
deter businesses and individuals from investing in and locating to the CBD. It will indeed lead to businesses leaving the CBD
Impact the quality of life of residents in the city and deter shoppers and the broader community from coming into the city.
Damage Melbourne’s international reputation and image. This will impact our major events and tourists coming to the city
Lead to a long-term decline in economic activity and a reduction in job opportunities.
Finally, I ask, do any of us want our children or grandchildren to become inured to homelessness, drug addiction, crime and public sex acts?
This is what will happen on our streets if we do not act now to stop it.
It is now inevitable that the argument from the illicit drug apologists will gain sway; you could soon have your own local injecting den with all the outfall the residents of North Richmond have and continue to endure in your neighbourhood.
The Drug problem escalates exponentially because no action is being taken to address it, only to facilitate its growth. More injecting rooms increase drug use leading to more overdoses and more crime to support the habits created, not less.
We believe that due to the latest review of the North Richmond facility, some startling numbers were released that can be used in a spurious argument to expand the project.
And as though the on-ground reality has no bearing on the philosophical and political intent to expand injecting rooms, for the convenience of addicts and users at the expense of the community.
The most generous thing that can be said of the Richmond facility review is that there is no evidence that addicts and users are treated or are released from their addiction at all, and the report even admits that the sixty-odd alleged addicts whose lives were saved because of the room is at best an inflated estimate. They just don’t know the effectiveness.
However, what is not beyond doubt is the facility promotes and facilitates drug use and, moreover, provides a convenient location for dealers to operate.
The City of Yarra has been collecting discarded syringes around the neighbourhood adjacent to the Drug facility. Before the Pandemic, they collected 8,000 per month or 260 per day.
After the Pandemic, that number has skyrocketed to 18,000 a month or 600 daily. This is unequivocal evidence that supports the Richmond resident’s claims of an explosion of drug use around the facility and absolutely debunks any claim the facility reduces harm by reducing drug use.
These numbers do not include the number of syringes dispensed and used within the facility.
What this figure does, is open the window to the extent of the problem with drug addiction that the community of North Richmond is dealing with.
At least 600 or 25 every hour, 24/7 addicts, are shooting up in their neighbourhood, plus the addicts transiting to shoot in the facility; this is truly a pandemic.
We oppose the concept of a safe Injecting room in absolute terms but accept without question that addiction is a medical issue.
Sourcing illicit drugs by addicts and associated unlawful behaviours is unquestionably a Police matter.
It is irrefutable that addicts cannot maintain a severe addiction without resorting to crime, and one of the most prolific crimes is drug dealing. So why wouldn’t they congregate in Richmond, where there is little risk of being charged with dealing?
The current drug honey pot, courtesy of the Victorian Government, an area where drug dealing can occur with minimal risk of prosecution, is unacceptable.
The safe injecting room is an abject failure for the community of North Richmond and Victoria generally.
Using the syringe statistics has a danger of creating a perceived need to replicate these facilities throughout the country and metropolitan community—a need not for the community but for the addicts.
As we have argued before, the current approach to the drug issue supports the drug industry, contrary to what is claimed. The Marketing model for that industry is well-serviced by Government strategies in support of their trade.
The risk to all Victorians is that the Richmond Model is replicated elsewhere.
That model uses the community health centres as their operational base.
Community Health centres are attractive because of their medical resources beyond the supervision of drug use.
We all must be vigilant against the spread of these insidious drug facilitator programs in lieu of the introduction of a quarantine system for addicts.
You will never get an addict to action rehabilitation when high, as in the injecting rooms.
To be effective, the addict must be sober when help is offered to have any chance of acquiescing.
The Community Advocacy Alliance has been restrained in our criticism of the Premier of this State as we respect the democratic process. Still, there comes a time, issues and place where we can no longer remain silent because we would be failing to advocate for the Community.
The Community has every right to expect that our elected officials act lawfully and ethically, delivering the services, infrastructure and good governance the Community expects.
The political machinations orbiting around the latest IBAC findings involving the Premier are just a bridge too far. We need as a community to stand up and be vocal, holding him to account.
We accept that the IBAC Act restricts the ability of IBAC to lay charges against certain people based on the nature of the alleged misbehaviour, noting that similar behaviour by anybody else would not be tolerated. However, given what has been reported in the media on the IBAC, raises severe doubts about the competency of our Legal system to deal with corruption or criminal endeavours.
Although IBAC cannot lay criminal charges in these circumstances, that does not mean there has not been criminal behaviour. There is no absolution of the Premier in the IBAC reports.
Given the information in the public domain, two alleged offences would have a very good prospect of succeeding, and, depending on the Premier’s advice, a third offence and the most serious would apply.
Primarily multiple counts of Misconduct in Public Office seem to be the most prolific offence, and it is arguable the Premier and others have engaged in multiple Conspiracies to commit other criminal offences-most notably, Theft by Deception from the State.
The most recent exposure of the movement of funds to the HSU needs further investigation to see where all the funds ended up and with whom, and was that purpose even legal? Just because the money was moved within the government and union sphere does not necessarily mitigate theft.
The Premier’s behaviour over an extended period of memory malfunctions is also highly questionable because if it is deliberate, it is undoubtedly Perjury when he is speaking under oath and Misconduct in Public Office at other times.
He has repeatedly used memory lapses when questioned under oath.
And there is also the matter of the notes.
Are we to believe that with a posse of advisers, the Premier does not have access to logs or notes, contemporaneous or otherwise and audio recordings of the important decisions he is involved in?
Are we to believe that the Premier is so unprofessional he operates on a wing and a prayer and has no reference material on his conversations on critical matters of State?
If that is the case and he has the compromised memory span that he claims, the lack of records on important issues of the State would rate as deliberate misconduct.
Either he has repeatedly given false evidence under oath or withheld documents from multiple inquiries, all of which amount to multiple offences of Perjury or Misconduct in Public Office, -or his mental acuity is questionable, making him unfit for Office.
He can’t have it both ways.
We know that he has used the memory lapse response before a number of inquiries, and on each occasion, it was reported that he used it multiple times. Although Perjury is rated as an extremely difficult case to prosecute, nevertheless, in this circumstance, each time during each examination he used the memory lapse answer under oath, he potentially committed a further offence.
What makes these allegations of Perjury offences so egregious is their proliferation and the high profile of the person responsible. These acts alone serve to undermine the rule of law and encourage others to perjure themselves in all jurisdictions where sworn evidence is relied upon, without consequences.
It is essential that this matter be tested in Court to determine if the actions amounted to Perjury.
At the very least, there is a ‘prima facie‘ case for which his guilt or innocence must be tested.
Why should the Premier be protected from prosecution when anybody else in the Community would have been charged?
We are not arguing for a change of government but that the law be applied equally to all.
Allegedly we are all equal before the law as a fundamental Human Right. Still, the actions of this State’s legal system have now breached the rights of all other Victorians by not prosecuting the Premier.
Because the IBAC Act says IBAC cannot prosecute, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Chief Commissioner can.
The Parliament can censure him and refer the matter to the DPP or the Chief Commissioner, which must now happen.
It is also imperative to avoid repetition by others in power, that the Premier, when forced from Office by his colleagues, the most likely scenario, is his discretions do not simply disappear with him.
That would be a travesty of justice of monumental proportions and give license to others to behave in a similar way – integrity in government and the Legal system is then severely compromised, and the integrity of both may end up unrecoverable.
The only other alternative, is we will have to rely on the media to achieve the same result through relentless pressure until his colleagues and Party do what the legal system has failed to do
Why, in 2023, are we still sacrificing children? The North Richmond ‘Safe’ Injecting Room’s very site exposes young children to sights no child should ever have to witness. Have any studies been conducted as to the psychological damage these children may suffer from being exposed to the activities of these drug users? If not, why not? The adverse impact on the local population of law-abiding citizens has been devastating. The location puts the community at risk, but the very essence of the zone for police means not only are drug dealers and users protected from arrest, dealers and users have a level of protection not available to local residents.
Locals, including very young children, have been attacked and harassed by drug users, have witnessed dead bodies in the streets, had their properties damaged, and have seen men having oral sex with men. Other sexual activities of every description are committed in open view.
Parents suffer the constant fear of their children being harmed by the presence of contaminated discarded needles and the behaviours of drug users and children themselves suffer similar fears.
The CAA is opposed to, so-called, Safe Injecting Rooms and has promoted an alternative health-based approach to treating the users of illicit drugs. See https://caainc.org.au/safe-injecting-rooms-a-misnomer/. We see jailing offenders as a last resort. However, our pleas for a real effort to dramatically reduce the number of illicit drug users have fallen on deaf ears. The North Richmond injecting room, rather than reducing illicit drug use, actually facilitates the consumption of dangerous drugs, encourages drug dealers and has had minimal success in turning users away from their habit. Of those lives saved, how many of these users administered a very powerful dose because they knew that if they overdosed, help was at hand? Clearly, the government of Victoria cares more about the welfare of drug addicts than about the well-being of the local population and particularly the welfare of young children.
The CAA implores you to use your power to at least have this facility moved to a site away from our kids and to a place that will not impact the community and enter into discussions examining an alternative that will actually reduce drug addiction, not facilitate its growth. Children are too vulnerable and valuable to sacrifice in the interests of users of illicit drugs.
Kelvin (Kel) Glare AO APM Chair Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. Ivan W. Ray Chief Executive Officer
This is what children have to experience in North Richmond on a daily basis, multiple times and worse. Stepping around comatose addicts or being accosted by the vertical ones. Would you let your kids experience this? The families of North Richmond have to, compliments of the State Government. They didn’t get a choice; the addicts do.
The Herald Sun today, Apr 12 2023, reported on the violence surrounding young children involved in violent clashes as part of a ‘Fight Club’ fad operating within the school system. The club and its protagonists are not gender specific.
Organised through social media, these fights appear vicious and common. It comes after the Herald Sun revealed earlier this week that more than 130 brutal fights involving kids had been posted on the Instagram page which celebrates vicious brawls, including more than 30 just in the past week, reported in just one area of Melbourne.
These events involve at least ten schools, and the social media site used has 2000 followers.
These statistics are beyond alarming, and if anybody is naive enough to see this as a school problem, the spill over into the broader community is inevitable; watch out.
Add to that, the complaints from teachers about violence and lack of discipline in the school system directly impacts the learning progress of all students and the safety in the teacher’s workplace. There is little wonder that teachers are hard to recruit. Who wants to go to work with a real risk of getting bashed? No wonder the standard of education is in such decline.
The CAA has raised these issues for a number of years, so there are no excuses for inaction that our community leaders can present – they have been warned ad infinitum, yet have chosen not to act.
It is sad to say that death or acute injury to a student, at school, or a teacher is inevitable. School shootings, the scourge of America, almost will inevitably come to our schools. Perhaps our gun laws may reduce the incidence of firearms, but bladed weapons will be our nemesis.
Putting the collective heads in the sand by those responsible is a disgrace of epic proportions.
This problem is escalating and will not go away unless they act. Stop looking for excuses to divest your responsibility to others; take a leadership position and act; that is supposed to be your job.
When the community realises that the inaction of those with the power to make changes have avoided doing so, and our most valuable resource and future are in decline, they will be looking to lay blame, which could hurt those responsible as much as the kids now suffer.
The violence our children is exposed to can only lead to an upsurge in violence later in life for these children as they see violence as a means to an end.
As an example, it is not rocket science that the children of North Richmond who are being desensitised to the perils of illicit drugs, exposed to the outcomes daily, will lead to many of those children taking up the ‘cool’ life of an addict.
Will the leadership of today take responsibility for those outcomes?
If we think there is an epidemic of Domestic violence, now wait a decade. As children of today enter relationships as adults, the solution to dispute resolution (FDR) will be domestic violence on a scale that will make today’s skyrocketing incidents seem tame.
Inaction by government and police leadership is responsible, and ducking and weaving will not ameliorate the moral responsibility of failure by notable individuals from both entities.
To the current Government and police leadership, the recent headlines about youth violence can only be ignored at your peril.
With over four hundred years of Policing experience and a raft of other disciplines in the CAA, it would be unwise to ignore the warnings and dismiss the solutions we have proffered.
In 2016 we warned of a coming crime tsunami which was ignored, and the prediction eventuated.
Our feedback from the community is that it is getting sick and tired of inaction on critical social areas while less important, on a quantitative scale, are getting the attention.
This is the litany of issues raised by the CAA that have been ignored.
There is no doubt that additional education of students on the negative aspects and risks of drugs is essential, as are support services for those affected. Still, if ever there was an argument for the allocation of Police Resources to schools to work to prevent the problem, then this is it.
In other States, Police are embedded in Secondary Schools as part of a structured Police In Schools Program, but that does not seem to be a worthy allocation of resources in this State. Paradoxically in other States with structured Police In Schools Programs, Crime rates are falling.
Assistant Commissioner Nugent correctly highlights how the drug issue in schools feeds into the ever-increasing crime rate.
We cannot expect teachers to deal with the criminal aspect of the Drug problem in Schools.
Comment;There is no evidence that police actively tried to address this issue- possibly seen as a School problem.
Apart from the obvious advantages of a safer community overall, the proposal to reintroduce the Police In Schools Program to Primary Schools and embed police in Secondary Schools (PISP) would see a substantial increase in safety for teachers.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) has submitted the PISP proposal to both the Government and the Opposition. However, only the Liberal Opposition has embraced and announced the inclusion of a PISP in their policy.
This initiative would be the most effective way to keep our children safe, help protect our educators and reduce stress and achieve better educational outcomes for our children.
Comment; Twelve months later, after multiple representations, no action was taken.
The Herald Sun today, Apr 12 2023, reported on the violence surrounding young children involved in violent clashes as part of a ‘Fight Club’ fad operating within the school system. The club and its protagonists are not gender specific.
Organised through social media, these fights appear vicious and common. It comes after the Herald Sun revealed earlier this week that more than 130 brutal fights involving kids had been posted on the Instagram page which celebrates vicious brawls, including more than 30 just in the past week, reported in just one area of Melbourne.
These events involve at least ten schools, and the social media site used has 2000 followers.
These statistics are beyond alarming, and if anybody is naive enough to see this as a school problem, the spill over into the broader community is inevitable; watch out.
Add to that, the complaints from teachers about violence and lack of discipline in the school system directly impacts the learning progress of all students and the safety in the teacher’s workplace. There is little wonder that teachers are hard to recruit. Who wants to go to work with a real risk of getting bashed? No wonder the standard of education is in such decline.
The CAA has raised these issues for a number of years, so there are no excuses for inaction that our community leaders can present – they have been warned ad infinitum, yet have chosen not to act.
It is sad to say that death or acute injury to a student, at school, or a teacher is inevitable. School shootings, the scourge of America, almost will inevitably come to our schools. Perhaps our gun laws may reduce the incidence of firearms, but bladed weapons will be our nemesis.
Putting the collective heads in the sand by those responsible is a disgrace of epic proportions.
This problem is escalating and will not go away unless they act. Stop looking for excuses to divest your responsibility to others; take a leadership position and act; that is supposed to be your job.
When the community realises that the inaction of those with the power to make changes have avoided doing so, and our most valuable resource and future are in decline, they will be looking to lay blame, which could hurt those responsible as much as the kids now suffer.
The violence our children is exposed to can only lead to an upsurge in violence later in life for these children as they see violence as a means to an end.
As an example, it is not rocket science that the children of North Richmond who are being desensitised to the perils of illicit drugs, exposed to the outcomes daily, will lead to many of those children taking up the ‘cool’ life of an addict.
Will the leadership of today take responsibility for those outcomes?
If we think there is an epidemic of Domestic violence, now wait a decade. As children of today enter relationships as adults, the solution to dispute resolution (FDR) will be domestic violence on a scale that will make today’s skyrocketing incidents seem tame.
Inaction by government and police leadership is responsible, and ducking and weaving will not ameliorate the moral responsibility of failure by notable individuals from both entities.
To the current Government and police leadership, the recent headlines about youth violence can only be ignored at your peril.
With over four hundred years of Policing experience and a raft of other disciplines in the CAA, it would be unwise to ignore the warnings and dismiss the solutions we have proffered.
In 2016 we warned of a coming crime tsunami which was ignored, and the prediction eventuated.
Our feedback from the community is that it is getting sick and tired of inaction on critical social areas while less important, on a quantitative scale, are getting the attention.
This is the litany of issues raised by the CAA that have been ignored.
There is no doubt that additional education of students on the negative aspects and risks of drugs is essential, as are support services for those affected. Still, if ever there was an argument for the allocation of Police Resources to schools to work to prevent the problem, then this is it.
In other States, Police are embedded in Secondary Schools as part of a structured Police In Schools Program, but that does not seem to be a worthy allocation of resources in this State. Paradoxically in other States with structured Police In Schools Programs, Crime rates are falling.
Assistant Commissioner Nugent correctly highlights how the drug issue in schools feeds into the ever-increasing crime rate.
We cannot expect teachers to deal with the criminal aspect of the Drug problem in Schools.
Comment; There is no evidence that police actively tried to address this issue- possibly seen as a School problem.
Apart from the obvious advantages of a safer community overall, the proposal to reintroduce the Police In Schools Program to Primary Schools and embed police in Secondary Schools (PISP) would see a substantial increase in safety for teachers.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) has submitted the PISP proposal to both the Government and the Opposition. However, only the Liberal Opposition has embraced and announced the inclusion of a PISP in their policy.
This initiative would be the most effective way to keep our children safe, help protect our educators and reduce stress and achieve better educational outcomes for our children.
Comment; Twelve months later, after multiple representations, no action was taken.
What a shocking headline, and to think this is the tip of the iceberg.
Most perpetrators are children, so the response is even more alarming than the problem.
The implied strategy to prosecute indicates the failed Law and Order principles applied in this State, where it is more important to prosecute than prevent the offence in the first place.
Many perpetrators, children as young as ten, have barely learnt that there can be consequences to their actions and charging a few kids will not help many victims.
To argue that it will be a deterrent is absolute rubbish.
The severity and the effect of the problem must not be understated. It can devastate the victim, but handling it in a draconian fashion will inevitably lead to more significant problems.
We must be about preventing or managing the problem.
Comment; In 2018 we did not predict that any government would be so inept as to raise the age of criminal responsibility, but they are considering doing so. The consequences of that flawed proposal are yet to be fully realised. But this shocking revelation in relation to stalking only further motivated the CAA to take action, and that is when we decided in 2019 to act where VicPol and the Government would not.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) proposes developing a structured school-based program entitled the Police Veterans in Schools Program (PVISP). The pilot program aims to identify the feasibility of using retired and former police members to deliver a program to teach children community values, the role of police and the law and a suite of victim reduction strategies. Central to this program is building relationships between young people and police so that respect can be developed for the policing function.
Comment; From frustration and inaction by VicPol, the CAA designed and built a School-based program to be delivered by Police Veterans to dovetail with the State school’s curriculum. The CAA recruited a number of Schools who were very enthusiastic and equally enthusiastic retired police to operate a Pilot to demonstrate the program’s effectiveness. But unfortunately, the day the program was to start, COVID hit, stopping the program.
From day one VicPol was invited to be involved in the CAA initiative.
On Feb 6 2020, The Age education editor, Adam Carey, reported that a global survey shows Australian classrooms are among the least disciplined in the world.
Learning time is lost to noise and disorder, and many students cannot work well in class.
Australia ranked 70th out of 77 participating nations in the OECD’s 2018 index of disciplinary climate.
Coupled with the abysmal level of Australian students learning Maths, it is high time that discipline is reintroduced into all classrooms.
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) will introduce police veterans into selected schools in 2020. Our program (PVISP) was launched on Nov 23 2019, and sought to instil in students the basic tenets of good citizenship and provide students with the skills to avoid becoming involved in crime or being victimised.
Comment; How much better position would we now be in had these early warnings been heeded? To blame COVID is an absolute cop-out, as a little creative application could have introduced the concept to the school population and would have helped and been superior to the current approach. But we are now twelve months out of COVID, and still, inaction is the outcome. How many warnings must there be?
Commissioner Ashton’s letter to the School Principals was blatantly designed to undermine the Police Veteran’s School volunteers. He set out a broad raft of mainly reactive claims that allegedly are applied somehow to schools.
The problem is schools generally know nothing about it. It can only be described as spin.
School principals that have contacted us are either angry or confused because they never see what Ashton claims to be happening. Instead, they embraced the Police Veterans In Schools Program (PVISP).
Comment; Even with Ashton’s letter to schools criticising and distancing VicPol from the program, most schools still wanted to proceed, if only on an informal basis. Aggravating the letter, an internal memo was sent by VicPol to all police stations directing them not to cooperate with schools involved in the program or members of the CAA. Even so, the school’s commitments generally did not wain; however, COVID ended that.
Victoria, do not underestimate the importance of the announcement by Chief Commissioner Patton of a Police in Schools Program (PISP) (Herald Sun 24/3/21).
This change in the policing approach is very significant and will have a positive impact on the lives of us all.
The failure of former Police Chief Commissioners to re-implement this important Policing strategy is partly responsible for the increased crime rates in past years, particularly in serious crimes committed by juveniles.
The reintroduction of a structured PISP has been the cornerstone and the basis for the formation of the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA), which I have the privilege to chair.
As a group, we have worked for six years for this outcome, and we unreservedly congratulate Chief Commissioner Patton for reintroducing this program.
At this time, we were very heartened when the current Chief Commissioner, Shane Patton APM announced that VicPol would finally implement a formal Police schools program for Victoria.
Comment; Unfortunately, two years later, we are yet to see the Chief Commissioners’ commitment realised.
We do not question the commitment and intent of the Chief as we believe he was genuine. Still, we are advised that he struck headwinds from other Senior executives who coincidently featured in the era when former Commissioner Nixon cancelled the project originally. Ashton followed through attempting to stop the reintroduction, all be it by veterans not impacting the Police resource argument.
The objectors can be easily identified by their lack of policing skills and poor understanding of proactive policing, the most effective type. The need to replace these people with enlightened and competent executives has never been more urgent.
Victoria Police have rolled out justification for not introducing a formal police schools program, and the list of police activities in schools at first glance is impressive until closer examination reveals a huge serving of spin is all it is.
Police attending schools on an ad-hoc basis with no structured curriculum is both inane and inept akin to smoke and mirrors. It is also the easy way out, just playing with the kids.
It is flawed dramatically, with no ability to measure outcomes or coordinate and target issues of concern with no ability to modify to rising challenges.
The current approach is similar Police Lecture Squad of many years ago. This allegedly highly trained Police team visited schools on a full-time basis and prided itself on its specialist status.
It featured prominently in Annual Reports and was seen as the frontline in working with kids.
This Team were briefed about a severe problem in a particular school and tasked to rearrange their schedule to address the issue urgently.
After much resistance, the Team arranged to see the school at an assembly of the whole school. (Avoiding confronting the age group responsible for the concerns)
To the amazement and embarrassment of their supervisors, the Team presented a short dissertation on pedestrian road safety and did not address or mention the serious issue the school faced.
As a direct result, the Team was disbanded and transferred to Operational Duties.
Where this Chief Commissioner is facing headwinds either in executive management or at the coordinating level, those placing the roadblocks or are unable to perform their task must be removed, and competent people deployed to the function.
This question is not an allegation and is posed in response to an article that appeared in the Guardian on the 12th of May 2021 under the headline ‘Queensland police discriminated against 200 potential male recruits in favour of women’ and sent to the CAA by a concerned reader of our recent article ‘Police staffing faces a perfect storm’.
Whether this has applied in Victoria, we do not know, but anecdotal information has been consistent that male recruit applicants are routinely discarded without giving a reason. They have apparently not been advised of any deficiencies so that they can address them, which seems unfair.
Moreover, the number and ratio of Police Training squads is no firm indication as to whether there is discrimination because we do not know if all the female recruits have been selected on merit and the males used to fill up the numbers.
This leads to the suspicion that an ‘aspirational ‘(euphemism for discrimination) gender quoter system may be being applied in Victoria.
The Guardian article reports on the findings of the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission which said, ‘…the state police service’s 50/50 recruitment strategy resulted in discriminatory practices being used against male candidates.’
As a result of the findings, three QPS employees responsible for the practice have been suspended, and a fourth had already left the service.
Interestingly the role of those suspended QPS employees and their rank were not disclosed. However, the Corruption Commission was clear on where the problems lay, senior command.
We would like to be reassured that this process has not been in action in Victoria because if it has, then it is inevitable that the position will be challenged at some stage.
Building transperancy in to the system is essential.
If it is in operation, either officially or otherwise, it is in direct contravention of the Equal Opportunities Act 1995 Section 16, which prohibits discrimination on a number of Attributes – amongst the list of attributes is gender and race, along with a number of others.
Equal Opportunities Act 1995
Part 4—When is discrimination prohibited?
Division 1—Discrimination in Employment
16 Discrimination against job applicants
An employer must not discriminate against a person—
(a) in determining who should be offered employment; or
(b) in the terms on which employment is offered to the person; or
(c) by refusing or deliberately omitting to offer employment to the person; or
(d) by denying the person access to a guidance program, an apprenticeship training program or other occupational training or retraining program.
Alarmingly, potential recruits in Victoria spend nearly a thousand dollars preparing for their assessment.
Spending that sort of money, it is reasonable that the applicants can be confident the selection process is fair and legal. With the cost, apart from being a clear disincentive, it eliminates many potential recruits who are financially disadvantaged.
We struggle to find any other career stream where applicants have to cover the costs of the employer in their assessment.
Being poor is not an egregious attribute. Arguably, people in this cohort may be better equipped for a Policing role with their life experiences with perhaps compassion and understanding. It also disadvantages specific ethnic and other sectors of the community.
The discrimination against this group shrinks the potential recruiting pool.
Recruiting for any Police Force is a critical function and determines the future of that organisation; therefore, it is imperative that all recruits are treated equally and according to the Law.
Applying discrimination in the recruiting process is unconscionable, given the expectations of successful recruits.
The community reasonably expects Police to act impartially without fear or favour, including swearing an oath to that effect. It expects the same from the organisation.
The CAA sincerely hopes that the Queensland experience has not operated in Victoria.
If it has, the community is entitled to know and needs to be reassured that the matter is fixed and those responsible have been dealt with.
Starting a career in the shadow of processes based on inequality or bias is no way to expect good outcomes, particularly when it is in direct contravention of Legislation. That inequity and bias can be ingrained at the start of a police career suggests it is unlikely that it will not have a deleterious effect on the individual’s performance during their career.
A Police member performing their duty does not police only one sector of the community, but all, and must apply the Law equally. Therefore, it matters not the gender, ethnicity, or other personal traits of applicants; what matters is the application of the Law.
That the makeup of a Police Force is from a broad church is a good thing, but when quotas are applied, it is counterproductive.
The CAA has no issue with and welcomes female Police recruits to the organisation, as it does for any ethnicity or from anywhere on the social economic scale: the Force is better for it.
However, we feel that any discrimination is repugnant and reflects poorly on the organisation as it places a shadow over many members who never know whether they were appointed on merit, gender, or ethnic-based quota systems.
This does not lead to a cohesive and effective workforce.
It is of serious concern to the community that Victoria Police is apparently having difficulty recruiting sufficient numbers to fill the vacancies created by retirements and other staff exits.
Not only will the community feel the impact of the Police not being available to respond to their needs, but Police will endure substantial frustration not having proper numbers available, with an increased workload falling on those still there. This will substantially accelerate the loss of members through stress-related issues.
We do not need to look too far over the horizon to see a perfect storm brewing into an untenable situation or even a crisis for the Force, and the community, because they are both inextricably linked.
The four significant contributors converging are.
Stress on Police
There has been, and continues to be, an escalation in Police leaving due to stress-related issues.
Recruits are difficult to attract.
The Force is having difficulty attracting suitable recruits in the current employment environment.
Public employee staff cuts
The most recent announcement by the Government to make a substantial cut in Public Service employees, with, at this stage, emergency services, Police, ambulance and Fire services not been quarantined. The impact will be devastating.
Impact of Migration
And to magnify the impact of these issues, the net migration intake has exploded, with hundreds of thousands of migrants arriving in Victoria.
What can be done? Quite a lot, actually, and putting one’s head in the sand waiting for the inevitable is not one of them. Secondly, VicPol, as tempting as it may be, must not lower its standards but devise creative ways to cover this shortfall. Altering standards is short-sighted and will lead to worse outcomes down the track. Kicking the can down the road is not a good management strategy.
Stress on Police
In our view, there has been less than appropriate management for many members suffering from stress over an extended period. Management seemingly takes the easy way out and funnels members with stress out of the job rather than the more difficult task of facilitating or working with clinicians to overcome the issue. Management lacks the capacity to be innovative and create pathways for solutions to help relieve the stress on individuals, and that anomaly must be addressed
Many members who have left suffering PTSI have two common threads.
Police management was a major contributor to the degree of their stress injury, and
Following close behind were the insurers and either Workover or Gallagher Bassett, contributing to their issues.
Some sufferers seemed to have been more affected by the above two issues than the issues that caused their stress in the first place. If that seems a contradiction, it is, but they are both issues that should be capable of being addressed relatively easily with VicPol management commitment. Somewhere in the order of fifty per cent of the aggravating problems could be reduced substantially, improving the chances of retaining the member as a worthwhile contributor.
We have always believed that expecting a person suffering, either suspected or confirmed PTSI, to negotiate on their own behalf is unconscionable; they are injured. So instead, each member must be appointed a case manager to assist them with making sound decisions. Implementing such a scheme is essential, but the advocate must be given influence within the organisation, or otherwise, they will be ineffective.
A case manager needs the minimum following attributes;
Maturity -intimate knowledge of Police culture -deep understanding of Force policies, procedures and structure – advanced life skills – proven leadership and communication skills.
Former senior Police officers would be ideally suited for this task.
Recruits difficult to attract.
The current employment environment and the image trashing VicPol has suffered in recent years are forces working against the flow of recruits.
The current marketing campaign’s underlying message is ‘ come play with our toys’.
That approach has been tried before without remarkable success and, on some levels, is insulting to the calibre of recruits VicPol would want to attract.
A campaign ‘’are you good enough’ will pay closer to the psych of the recruits VicPol should favour.
Anecdotal feedback suggests that police veterans’ children, who should be a fertile recruiting ground felt they were discriminated against in the recruiting process.
Whether this is a fair criticism, we do not know, but we do know little effort is made to provide a pathway for this potential market.
Although there are signs of improvement, the treatment of veterans by all levels of VicPol has been very negative and also contributed to this resource not producing the number of recruits it could.
Public employee staff cuts.
As unpalatable as this is, it will probably only be the Police Association that attacks the Government; VicPol can’t.
However, VicPol can be very smart. These cuts are all about saving money for the Government.
This is work for specialist Actuarial and Financial analytical experts working with creative Police management generally but more specifically in recruiting and staff resorucing.
VicPol, to its credit, started the move towards establishing a viable reserve, now advertising for former Police to return for a specialised task. That will be an economic saving while achieving Force objectives.
While small-scale, it can be built on.
Although marketing this first approach is a bit rough around the edges, arguably insulting applicants before they consider the offer is not a sensible approach. Nevertheless, it is a positive move and should be lauded, not criticised, by a minority of veterans, as is currently the case.
A stumbling block often put forward is that Police veterans are no longer sworn Police.
For a very long time, Police who had retired retained their Certificate of Identity. The privilege of retaining their ID has never been abused by the thousands of Veterans who have kept them, it is a respect thing.
The same would apply if the Police Regulation Act was amended so that Police veterans retained their status as sworn. At the discretion of the Chief Commissioner, who may withdraw the privilege from individuals if circumstances arise.
The judicious use of these Veterans would save money while maintaining and improving the police service. Retired members are often a bit physically frayed through age, but that does not affect their mental acuity; it just means they can’t jump fences chasing crooks anymore, probably the same for many older members still serving.
It is hoped that VicPol is closely looking at the Military Reserve model for inspiration rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
Impact of Migration
The number of migrants that will be calling Victoria home over the next little while is bordering on scary, particularly if you are charged with the responsibility of ensuring law and order for this new cohort that will come with its own set of cultural and other values that may not be compatible with Australian values or laws.
Of course, VicPol has been dealing with this issue for many years very successfully, as we are a migrant country and welcome their contribution. But we do not recall a time when so many are likely to arrive with issues that we cannot predict . While many commentators focus on the lack of infrastructure to accommodate the large influx, nobody seems to have applied their minds to the impact on Policing.
From a Policing perspective this influx is a bit like getting kicked when you are already on the ground.
Policing could be overwhelmed, leading to chaos.
The migration issue is a classic political move where one arm of the Government makes a decision to serve its needs, and dealing with the consequences is hived off to another level where the pain is really felt.
What we have set out is the prediction of a perfect storm bearing down on VicPol, the damage that may be caused is perhaps irreversible.
The CAA is alerting the organisation so that planning to deal with this perfect storm to be faced, can be escalated to the highest priority to minimise the inevitable damage.
Do you remember the shocking case of two-year-old James Bulger?
1993 James was abducted, tortured and murdered by two young boys. The murder happened in the UK, and Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were convicted for this atrocious crime. They were both ten years old when the offence occurred. The high-profile 1993 British case horrified the world, everybody was rightly stunned as to how that could happen, but it did.
James Bulger being abducted by Thompson and Venables.
2017 An eleven-year-old boy was charged with Murdering Patrick Slater in a brawl in Perth.
2020 Solomone Taufeulungaki, a Melbourne Teenager, was murdered by a gang of eleven, including two thirteen-year-olds. They have all been charged with Solomone’s murder.
Melbourne Teenager Solomone Taufeulungaki was murdered by children
2021. Five young people charged with Murder in Sydney, boys aged 13,14,15,13 and a girl aged 15, were apparently the perpetrators, all charged with the murder of a sixteen-year-old boy.
2023 Media report that a 13-year-old was charged with the murder of his 4-year-old sibling in Danville, Virginia, US. The 13-year-old was charged with murder after suffocating their sibling and confessing to the crime.
2023 The report (H/S 16/03/23 p.22) of the murder of a twelve-year-old girl by classmates aged twelve and thirteen who confessed the crime. The victim was stabbed thirty times and dumped in a wooded area.
In this incident, offenders were aged twelve and thirteen and was particularly gruesome and horrific; highlighting the folly of increasing the age of criminal culpability to fourteen.
This murder occurred in Germany, where the age of criminal responsibility has been lifted to fourteen, and neither perpetrator can be charged, raising some very interesting issues for Victoria, currently considering the same regressive move.
Will the victim’s family face being confronted by the perpetrators in their community?
How will the family cope knowing the murderers were not punished or even tried?
What happens if the perpetrators claim innocence? Their matter is never tried so they will be forever tarred with the title murderer? The legal maxim, innocent until proven guilty, may not reconcile with the Court of Public opinion.
What happens to the perpetrators? The sheer brutality requires the community to be protected.
Clearly, the police would have no power to intervene in any continuing offending, so who does?
We accept that these offences are not an everyday occurrence. Still, they are so brutal when they happen that the community cannot and will not tolerate this decriminalisation as part of being an enlightened society – particularly for the families of those who, as a result, have their loved ones’ lights put out, brutally and permanently.
These random examples are just a few of what happens, and it happens here, so we would be extremely foolish to take the ‘won’t happen here’ path.
It has and will continue to happen; the uncomfortable truth for the social dreamers is that as much as we might wish it, it is inevitable.
This current push in Victoria has the hallmarks of another Social construct that is not well thought out and devoid of an understanding of the consequences and reality.
The number of children aged 10-14 charged in 2007 was just over 10% (of all young people charged), but by 2016, the trend had the figure at 4.3%, according to the Crime Statistics Agency Vic.
Our current strategies are working, although they could be improved upon; why dabble, build on a solid foundation if you want enhanced results.
As the law currently stands in Victoria, a child over ten and under fourteen cannot be charged with a criminal offence unless they knew the alleged act was wrong when they did it. The safeguard of having an independent person/ parent present when the child is interviewed, to our knowledge, has never been challenged.
This proposal is like throwing the baby out with the bath water, inane.
There is no doubt that youth crime has grown overall, but then so has the community, and the Police Cautioning program, its years of success, with its low recidivism rate remaining the cornerstone of this multi-discipline approach in guiding young people away from crime. Still, it is not designed to deal with serious crimes committed by the very young, which has to remain the purview of the Courts.
The following questions we pose for the Government.
What mechanisms will be in place to protect the community?
What mechanisms will be designed to help victims?
What do police do with the child?
What protections exist to allay litigation for the victim or the perpetrator?
What strategies prevent criminals from exploiting and using children to commit crimes, particularly in the drug scene?
Germany has made a grave mistake with their approach, lifting the age to fourteen; there is no empirical data even to hint that the current system in Victoria of the age of responsibility is an issue.
A home invasion where victims are woken to find perpetrators in their houses is extremely frightening. However, this scare is not mitigated because the perpetrators are subsequently determined to be children. The victims will be just as terrified in some circumstances fearing for their life, irrespective of the age of the offenders. A list of Home invasions allegedly committed by children under fourteen would be too long to detail here.
The danger increases for the victim if the perpetrators are young, as they do not understand all the consequences of their actions. That is an irrefutable fact.
We have no issue with, and support developing strategies to reduce the incidence of juvenile offending and support any efforts in this area, and equally support the current multi-discipline approach to reduce the likelihood of young people reoffending.
However, we strongly reject the current proposal, which effectively removes the ability of police to give a formal caution where the child, the parents, and professionals can be brought together to assist the child’s direction and also completely ignores the rights of victims and the broader impact on the community. The risk of escalating child criminality is just too great.
We do strongly recommend that a formal and structured police-in-schools program be revisited as a preventative initiative with the added advantage that the assistance for the children can be coordinated with the schools bringing police and the professionals together to achieve better outcomes, focusing on prevention and follow-up of children cautioned, improving the outcomes for children. Such a program also educates children in the pitfalls of being involved in anti-social behaviour in all its forms and encourages their formal education.
Additionally, this program will support School staff confronted by children or parents and create an overall safer school environment for all, to improve educational outcomes overall.
So let’s hope sensible, pragmatic ideas prevail and raising the age of criminal responsibility is not pursued.
Premier – don’t do it.
The CAA would be happy to assist the Government in achieving a workable plan with reduced risks to all.
Public drunkenness is now under partisan political consideration—another half-baked approach to Public Policy.
Drunkenness has been a community issue since time immemorial, and there is no empirical data to show it is any worse or otherwise than it has been for many decades, relative to the size of the population.
Decriminalising public drunkenness is fixing a problem that does not exist to any significant degree.
As public drunkenness can be confused with homelessness, vagrancy, mental illness and drug abuse, it is, therefore, sensible that the ‘sobering up’ process should be done under medical supervision, which the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) supports. Equally, because the likelihood of belligerent behaviour is inclined to be more prevalent with drunkenness, securing and safety of these people and the community is and must remain a Police responsibility.
Once the affected person settles and the community is safe, the police can hand them to a facility where clinicians take responsibility.
This whole policy seems to have been designed by people without experience with drunks in the field.
Perhaps a little research should be undertaken, and then the proponents of this social adjustment may just find the number of persons convicted each year for drunkenness as a percentage of the population is meagre. And of those arrested and charged, even fewer are actually convicted, and no record of their indiscretion is recorded.
We reject absolutely the need for racial profiling in this process. Irrespective of the drunk’s heritage or race, they all need the same care.
Exposing the naivety of this proposal, the Herald Sun reports, “Patients at the sobering up site can only be taken with their consent and police or paramedics will need to step in if they become a safety risk or need urgent care.”
This statement alone raises very serious questions and exposes a lack of knowledge of a drunk person’s usual demeanour or the law.
With decriminalising drunkenness, the Police have no power to ‘Step-in’ when the contractor’s management of the drunk goes pear-shaped.
Drunks always consider they are not drunk enough to need care or admit to what they have consumed.
A person who is perceived to be drunk cannot give Informed consent at law.
Entering into a debate about sobriety, consent or otherwise, is a recipe for belligerence.
Our experience is it would be a rare drunk who would agree to the time out in the drunk tank.
How can a government sub-contractor physically intervene with a drunk?
What happens when a drunk is involved in a crime, either as a victim or a perpetrator – it does happen?
A serious risk assessment for contractors out on the street without powers is a disaster waiting to happen. The legal minefield this opens up for the liability of the government and contractors is breathtaking.
Another legal minefield will occur when the drunk decides they are sober enough to leave the facility, but the clinicians know they are not. Holding them even with their uninformed consent would be unlawful. (currently, Police have four hours to detain somebody who is drunk.)
Contractors will find difficulty hiring or retaining staff for this high-risk and filthy foul job.
Another small matter is suitable transport for drunks. The inevitable mess that often is associated with their transport is why police use a Divisional Van that can be hosed out. Putting a drunk in a traditional vehicle is impractical as vomit and other bodily fluids often exuded by drunks tend to permeate every nook and cranny and cannot be removed easily.
The consequence of placing multiple drunks in a facility not properly designed, quasi cells, will lead to inevitable conflict and a huge risk to clinicians.
All police know that when it is determined that a person is drunk, they must be decisive, not enter into debate and secure the drunk immediately to minimise the risk of injury to the drunk, the Police or the public. This skill is learnt and cannot be assumed to exist with untrained subcontractors. A questionnaire is no substitute for years of onsite experience.
The police power of arrest for drunk and disorderly must be left in place to protect the drunks, the Police and the public.
A pattern is now evolving with Political police. This is currently developing into the go-to solution for government initiatives. These new ‘Drunks Police’ have all the hallmarks of another enforcement arm of the government, as we experienced during the COVID pandemic.
Every Victorian should be very concerned about this move as it can lead to a Socialist state policed by Political apparatchiks who are not accountable to the State but to a political party. Untrained but politically accountable without independence to apply the drunks policy impartially.
Rather than contracting out these services, perhaps that funding should be applied to Policing and Ambulance services rather than an expensive contracting arrangement with our money, or will that money be borrowed?
With minimal cost, ‘Drunk Tanks’ are the answer and are legally more palatable. Drunks or other intoxicated people can be placed in clinicians’ care at these Tanks, and the problem is effectively solved.
It certainly gives the impression that those pushing these reforms care little about the individuals or do not comprehend the likely consequential outcomes and effects.
What is most disturbing is that the government is seeking solutions from bidding contractors, “..bidders have also been asked detail how their staff will respond to difficult situations.” Herald Sun 15th March ’23.
This proposition is preposterous, to say the least – how does a proper tendering process work if the bidder writes the policy? There is no way this can be an efficient or reasonable tendering process, with each bidder making their own rules, and it is an admission beyond doubt that the government does not know what it is doing and hopes a contractor will.
This issue has a whiff of appeasing a small cabal of extremists who claim to represent all of us. Well, they do not.
The only plan we can detect is a plan to introduce unnecessary change, popular with a small number of social reformers, intent on breaking down the structure of our democratic society and, in turn, our democracy, with crime and substance abuse rampant, destroying a sizeable ever-growing cohort of wasted lives at an astronomical cost to the community.
Drunk Tanks are like Drug shooting galleries – they do not address the issue but perpetuate it.
It seems obvious the extremist’s grand plan is to weaken society, allowing the growth of autocratic leadership to determine what is best for the rest of us; the problem is that they do not.
The horrifying concern is that the same protagonists pushing these reforms also push defunding the Police. The CAA executive has attended meetings where these issues were raised.
That social experiment has already been tried overseas and failed miserably, which has cost those communities more to rebuild Policing; one problem is the difficulty of very few recruits availing themselves of policing as a career, having seen what happened in the defunding period.
As far as we can tell, the issue of public drunkenness has arisen from one incident where a drunken person self-harmed in a police cell after being arrested for drunkenness.
As sad as that is, that was not the fault of the Police, or the existence of the Offence of Drunk and Disorderly, as we believe no evidence would have excluded the self-harm happening at any other facility, time or place and that drunkenness itself far too often leads to self-harm for which benign arrest is often the only viable solution.
Police see their intervention with somebody drunk in a public place as a Police function, but the sobering up process is a health issue.
Given the demands for service, the idea that drunks can be conveyed home or to some safe place by Police or ambulance is ludicrous.
If changes are to be made, they must be well-considered and practical to avoid numerous unintended consequences.
We strongly support the concept of a ‘Drunk Tank with’ medical oversight. That will improve the safety of the Drunks and the community. Instead of putting drunks in a cell, police can put them in a drunk tank for their four-hour sobering up.
The Herald Sun Editorial on the 3rd of March quotes the Premier saying,
“It may well be that there are new patterns of behaviours which are directly relevant to try to deal with that (drug Use) community and provide the safest environment, as well as pathways to treatment and therapy. This is just a common sense approach, “Mr Andrews said.
We think this statement says it all,
When did Drug users become a community? Calling them this elevates individuals whose only common purpose is illegal activity to a quasi-legitimate community group. This insults every other Victorian that feels they belong to a community. So next, we will have the Hoon Community, the Bikie community (nee gang), the home invasion community, the car stealing community and so on – inclusiveness has gone mad.
“ -provide the safest environment and pathways to treatment and therapy”. The glaring omissions are the victims and impact of Safe Injecting Rooms, which seem to have no place in this scheme.
Should they not be front of mind? Where is their ‘Safest environment’? Unlike Drug addicts who have made their own choices, the victims of these injecting rooms did not have an opportunity to choose but must suffer the consequences.
To ameliorate their situation, the Government has done nothing.
The Editorial also notes that the Richmond Facility has managed over 6355 overdoses. Which is incongruous with the concept of “Safe”.
The penny may drop with the proponents of the facility that the addicts are using the facility deliberately to ‘stretch the envelope’ on their dosage because if they push it too far and overdose, they will be looked after.
Effectively the rooms are used by addicts to use more drugs not less.
Equally, many addicts have already had a hit from other legal means, Methadone or other drugs, by Medical partitioners while we struggle for an appointment at the same doctors.
Naivety is rife in the halls of power- the addicts abuse the system at will.
What is also conveniently overlooked is that many addicts are driving to and from the facility on our roads under the influence of drugs. The risks are nearly beyond comprehension, and any government that would facilitate this is irresponsible.
We have substantial difficulty with the Government being involved in criminal activity. The Drug facility overtly provides a benefit to the drug trade providing a convenient hub to peddle their wares. How is it thought that addicts access their drugs? Being party to this criminality is a disgrace and clearly bad advice has been given to Government.
But of course, the Government would not seem to have a plan by considering the operation of a new Safe Drug facility, not next to a school in a health centre as in North Richmond but next to a transport hub where all Victorians using the hub will be mixed with drug addicts and drug pushers. All the problems caused in North Richmond will be multiplied tenfold, just what are they thinking?
With the convenience of public transport for the addicts, who would want to travel in a confined space with people reacting to drugs? Apart from everybody else, think about the risk to the thousands of children who use our public transport systems for school. How is it proposed they will be protected?
Injecting Rooms are neither safe for the addicts nor the community, no matter where you put them, as they do not even rate as a band-aid to the issue. It is even questionable that they save lives.
The CAA proposes a complete rethink on how to deal with the issue to provide the safest environment and pathways to treatment and therapy.
Following what is done internationally is only following a path to guaranteed failure.
A pathway exists to help addicts meaningfully, and reduce the impact on the community.
The CAA believes the solution will be based on proactive intervention, law enforcement (not passive avoidance) along with appropriate rehabilitative infrastructure.
The use of Health Orders to place addicts or users in a secure medical facility so that their overall health can be attended to, and the pathway to sobriety can be laid out for them, is the key.
A short hiatus in their addiction under medical care for fourteen days without access to their drug lifestyle, which is a substantial part of the addiction, will put them in a better position to deal with life issues they are facing and the community has a break from the associated crime of the addict or user.
This solution will most likely be very palatable to the broader community (who vote) and dramatically reduce the risks to the addicts (who do not vote) and the crime associated with this insidious disease.
A relevant and apt quote from one of our supporters who on another matter was reminded of the words of H L Mencken: ‘For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.’
As November 2023 closes in, marking sixty years since the enactment of the National Service Act 1964 requiring 20-year-old males, if selected by the scientific birth date marble out-of-the-barrel method, to serve in the army for two years reduced to eighteen months in 1971, followed by three years in the Army reserve.
During the period of National Service, one hundred and thirty-four serving Victoria Police Constables were conscripted.
Fifty-two of that number served overseas in war zones, predominantly in Vietnam.
The remainder served with Australia in multiple tasks, principally in the Provost Corp, now called Military Police, part of the Joint Military Police Unit.
There were a number of issues confronting these Police that were grossly unfair.
As soon as a serving member announced he had been called up, many police locations treated them with disdain as they would be one member down. Replacements were not provided, no matter how many Police on a Station were called up.
“It’s all right for you swanning off in the army for two years while we carry you.”
Somehow that was the fault of the Nasho.
There was no support for the members called up other than to continue to work their roster until enlistment day.
That many had to work at violent anti -Vietnam War demonstrations, it did not occur to the Police administration of the time to make any considerations given what the members were about to embark on. National Service with the real prospect of being sent to the Vietnam War Zone as fifty-two were.
We were given enough time to hand in our baton and handcuffs the day before we reported to the Army Swan Street barracks to commence our Military Service.
At least the administration was consistent – they never made contact during the Nasho’s Service, and when they returned, it was a repeat of when they left.
‘Where have you been – on leave?’
The vast majority of National Servicemen had their army pay made up to their civilian level but not the State of Victoria. Sir Arthur Rylah, the then Chief Secretary and Deputy Premier of Victoria turned down that request.
To add insult, the National Servicemen were required to maintain their Police uniforms for the duration of their army service; at their cost, their uniform allowance was stopped.
They were also disadvantaged by their superannuation.
Not only were payments taken out of their Army pay during conscription, but then on return had to back pay contributions due to salary increments in Police pay whilst absent. As a result, many National Servicemen were placed under financial stress.
The Vietnam War was very unpopular with a certain vocal cohort who demonstrated relentlessly and violently, and many of us were straight back on the front line when we returned.
With all that, the National Servicemen generally completed their police careers, many attaining high ranks and very successful careers serving the State.
But none of them was bitter.
The one thing that was irksome to the National Servicemen was they were never acknowledged as a group by Victoria Police. However, Chief Commissioner Shane Patton APM corrected this after sixty years.
The Service at the Police Chapel to dedicate an Honour Board for those Police members was held on the 18th of February, 2023.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) Saluting their Service project team played a pivotal role in the design and facilitation of the Service.
The Honour Board unveiled and dedicated at the Service is now installed in the foyer of “C’ Block at the Academy.
With support from the ADF, the spectacle exceeded the expectations of the seventy-plus Veterans and widows of Veterans and their families who attended and were entertained by the military and police vehicle displays, including a Divisional Van and a flyover by aircraft, both from that era.
The five-hundred guests were treated to a service full of the ceremony that only organisations like the ADF and the Police can display. The speeches were poignant, as was the presentation of the Police and military colours. The military bugler sounding the last post was particularly moving and contributed to the overall effectiveness of the planning for the event. Something many of the Veterans has commented on post the event.
From the feedback from Veterans, the Service well exceeded their expectations, with many saying they are very glad to have made an effort, particularly to hear the Chief Commissioner deliver an apology for the treatment of the National Servicemen by past police administrations.
Veterans who want to visit the Academy and view the Board now in situ can contact the CAA to make arrangements.
Interesting to see what happens, now that the idea of raising the age of criminal intent to fourteen years is facing scrutiny, even before it is introduced.
An idea that sounds wonderful in theory but fails the young people it seeks to benefit.
As reported on the 24th of February 2023 by the Herald Sun, a group of young offenders have been arrested, including boys under fourteen.
A 13-year-old faces nine charges, including attempted aggravated burglary, theft of a motor vehicle, affray, unlawful assault, burglary, theft, robbery, failure to answer Bail and committing an indictable offence while on Bail.
A 12-year-old boy is facing charges including theft of a motor vehicle, affray, robbery, shop theft, and committing an indictable offence while on Bail.
These are not isolated incidents and happen all too frequently.
The questions we have for the Premier are –
How will you deal with young violent thugs when you lift the age to fourteen? Will Police have no power to arrest once their age is established?
Having established their age, then what do the Police do with them? Put them back on the street to offend again?
What happens to the Police Cautioning Program that has served the State so well and is by far and away the most used and effective sanction when Police deal with young offenders? The caution will no longer be able to be offered in lieu of prosecution.
What are you going to tell the Victims – the offences committed by these young thugs hurt the Victim just as much, irrespective of the age of the perpetrator? Just because they were assaulted by a twelve-year-old, the damage is no less painful.
And what happens to the young perpetrator that will dissuade them from offending again?
What liability does the State carry for a failure to ensure the safety of the young perpetrators? It would seem a lot. There would be a ‘hue and cry’ if a young penetrator was seriously injured while committing a crime where the State failed, in their duty of care, to intervene in the childs criminal endeavours.
What protection is offered to victims of violent sex offenders in this cohort?
And of greatest concern is what happens when a young person in this cohort commits murder. It can and does happen.
If a young person is accused of a serious crime, that accusation may not leave them, which is particularly brutal if the child is innocent.
How do you propose to teach young people that there are consequences for unlawful acts?
The argument for the necessity of this move is not based on facts and will eliminate the option for a Police caution for children under fourteen.
“Of 5981 young people alleged to have committed an offence 56% received a caution, 45% were charged.
Consistent with the findings of previous studies, young people who were cautioned were less likely to re-offend than those charged. The current study also found a longer duration between the index incident and their first reoffending incident for cautioned young people as opposed to those charged.”
This government proposal has been suggested by people with little or no idea of the psyche of young people of this age.
If arrested, being sent home will be interpreted as, winning and beating the system.
Time for young people is now; no matter what they are told, if intercepted by the Police, they will immediately return to the social set that got them into criminality. (One of the great advantages leading to the success of the Police Cautioning Program is that it can be delivered in close time proximity to the offending, having a greater impact than a Court case some many months after the event from which the child has long moved on both in maturity and socially.)
These same young people are hazardous to the community because they have no concept of the consequences of their actions on victims.
The concept of Bail is also seen as them beating the system. They do not ignore the Bail but do not grasp what it means.
What is very obviously deficient in this proposal is what it intends to achieve.
Called progressive socialism, it is a concept heavy on the narrow emotive argument, a subjective bias of the perpetrator’s age, and sadly lacking in effectiveness.
Premier, if you want community support, please explain how you will reduce the suffering of Victims and how this proposal will benefit young people and steer them from a life of crime.
Avoiding consequences at that age, will instead ensure they become entrenched in a life of crime.
As reported in the Herald Sun on the 8th of December 2022, Deputy Commissioner Neil Paterson allegedly apologised for an incident involving a Red Cross blood donation worker who was left deeply upset by an encounter with him. It is unclear to whom he apologised.
Simply put, this incident should never have occurred, and we doubt a remote apology will right the wrong. There is no indication that the Red Cross worker has accepted the apology, From the report, we would understand why she may not.
This incident occurred in a café area at Police headquarters where the Red Cross woman approached Paterson. She was there recruiting blood donors, doing her job.
Paterson berated the woman in an area where there would have been large volumes of police employees. As a Deputy Commissioner in Police Headquarters, the imbalance in the encounter was dramatic and for all to see.
Berating a worker rather than taking his concerns to Red Cross in a private capacity, and there are many avenues open to him to do that, is like confronting and berating a junior constable in the suburbs for the behaviour of VicPol during the Gobbo affair.
Mr Paterson has form in this area, having previously achieved comprehensive media coverage for his attack on a Police Sergeant nearing retirement because his religious beliefs oppose homosexuality.
The similarity in his previously exposed incident was also a substantial power imbalance between a Deputy Commissioner and a Sergeant.
Paterson is not employed to peddle his personal agenda. When he puts on his ‘Salute Blue’ suit, he becomes a servant of the Chief Commissioner and an example for other Police to emulate.
It is trite to say that Police, especially senior Police, must not allow bullying. With that, it is also obvious that they should not be bullies. The incidents, while against different people, appear to indicate bullying behaviours. CAA is not saying Paterson is a bully. This is a matter for others to determine, but CAA does say that the behaviours alleged reflect poorly on Paterson and Victoria Police
This incident has broader implications for Victoria Police and the Chief Commissioner.
He was putting the Chief Commissioner in an unenviable position where he is conflicted between supporting one of his most senior executives and his responsibility to maintain discipline and good order in Victoria Police.
Expressing support for Paterson could send a message to all Police that you can use your uniform to pursue personal values with impunity. And you can bet it would end badly if it took off.
This issue will not go away, particularly if other Police are disciplined for inappropriate comments. Their defence will be obvious.
The Chief Commissioner must formally admonish Paterson. This needs to be public, to rebuild the structural damage to VicPol Paterson has created.
Paterson’s behaviour is contrary to the neutrality expected of Police. The CAA believes this behaviour brings ‘the Force into disrepute’ and further feeds the community’s perceptions of the lack of impartiality by the Police, magnified substantially because of his rank.
Would this behaviouir be toleated by Poilce Command for a more junior ranked police memeber.
The way the laws currently stand, only IBAC can take a complaint against any Police Commissioner, and CAA has little confidence they would do anything, making police executives seemingly beyond reproach, creating a protected species.
The Chief Commissioner is, in reality, the last bastion of the enforcement of proper standards. We invite him, as a man of integrity, to publicly rebuke Paterson for his obviously poor behaviour.
We also call on the Government to amend legislation to empower the Chief Commissioner to instigate and investigate complaints against his Senior Officers if required, even if that investigation is overseen by IBAC.
Some time ago, the CAA proposed a plan that made each Police Service Area (PSA) Manager Station Commander responsible for providing recognition for any Police Veterans who passed away in their area of responsibility.
The plan was proposed to the Chief Commissioner at a CAA, AGM pre-COVID.
This was linked to a proposed register to be kept for all Veterans. A statewide register devolved to the PSAs based on addresses. The veterans then could be identified should their welfare need attention—a notation made on the register that would enable a phone call or a visit at determined intervals to check welfare and keep them connected.
This would allow the register to be maintained if veterans changed addresses, were taken ill or were placed in care. The likelihood of a Veteran dying and none of his colleagues being aware is minimised.
Additionally, the local PSA manager was to contact and visit the Veteran’s family when they passed away. Apart from condolences, to seek permission to have a Police Officer of a rank, at least one above the deceased, read the Ode at the funeral.
As a mark of respect, the POLICE FLAG (not the Australian Flag) would be made available as a Pall for the coffin.
After the service, the Flag to be handed to the family as a mark of respect in perpetuity. ‘Buried under the Flag they served.’
The Chief Commissioner agreed to these proposals.
We were comfortable that he intended to implement them.
We accepted that during the COVID era, this proposal was unlikely to be followed through completely, but we incorrectly assumed that the components possible under COVID rules were implemented.
We have been shocked by the recent outpouring of dissatisfaction by Police Veterans and serving members on Social Media regarding the treatment of Veterans who recently passed away being routinely ignored by VicPol
The Chief Commissioner’s wishes were blatantly ignored.
We have then reviewed some other matters that the CAA has sought and gained support from the Chief Commissioner and have not been implemented.
A proposition that all Veterans living in a PSA should be identified and recorded at a Station should their welfare need attention.
A formal Police school program.
A program where an executive Officer would formally thank all members on retirement for their service. (An initiative raised by the CCP).
Recognising Police who were called up for National service. (This project is advancing, and the Dedication Service for their Honour Board is scheduled for February 2023 at the Police Chapel).
These issues are distinct from the myriad of other matters we have put to the Chief in submissions.
It is of very great concern that the Chief Commissioner can express a view, and the organisation fails to respect that view and follow through on it.
We have no reason to believe that the Chief Commissioner was not genuine in his views expressed. We are, however, very concerned that others have developed a strategy within the organisation to push back or ignore his wishes. We assume that is unless they agree with them.
A prime example of the cart leading the horse.
That is no way for an organisation like a Police Force to operate, and it raises the concern of what other matters approved by the Chief Commissioner the organisation has chosen to ignore.
The Chief Commissioner is the person who takes ultimate responsibility for the performance and function of the organisation, not those who seem to wish to undermine him.
The apparent evolution of insurrection within the upper echelons of Victoria Police undermines the Chief Commissioner’s authority; it is as embarrassing as it is wholly unacceptable.
This indicates that a flawed executive ‘Committee’ approach holds sway over the Chief Commissioner. Once that happens, the influence permeates down, meaning everybody can choose to follow or not follow the Chief’s directions. Discipline folds, and the ability to function as a cohesive body evaporates. This is not good for Policing or the community.
The first evidence of a problem we identified, was when we reflected on the Police COVID Response.
The Chief was at pains to prefer the issue of cautions instead of prosecutions for COVID breaches and took the unprecedented step of intervening personally to issue warnings.
That was until the quantity overwhelmed his capacity to deal with each case, and the principle of a caution was lost. Somebody or some people at a very high level in VicPol usurped the Chief Commissioner’s authority, and the control of the police response was overtaken by others, perhaps explaining the debacle that followed.
It now seems clear that some see the CCP as just a figurehead, and the faceless few are the power of the organisation.
The CAA is of the opinion that some seem to be using their position to remove the CCP to gain power for themselves.
This thinking is as flawed as the mechanism they have established to undermine the CCP. It will still be there if they succeed and can be just as easily used against them.
Senior police must unite in support of the Chief. And that is not just lip service, but function.
When senior officers do not display ethical leadership, this flows throughout the organisation, down to junior police.
The CAA is concerned there is a serious problem somewhere in the upper echelon.
Those responsible for undermining the Chief Commissioner should step aside or be removed from their positions; a purge would be justified and is, in our opinion, necessary.
It is time for those who would decriminalise the use of illicit drugs to think again.
Just when you thought it could not get any worse, a new drug, known as Flakka, has hit the streets and, apparently, is doing the rounds in the Dandenong Area.
And there is a suggestion that first responders have been told not to talk about it. Unfortunately, that strategy will not make it go away.
Flakka use will put at serious risk police, ambulance personnel, health workers and other emergency services people who have to deal with the users.
Not only will the users of Flakka be put at severe risk, but any member of the general public or family members of a user whom they happen to come across when under the influence.
More than likely, it does not hurt the proponents of legalising illicit drugs or those who stand to benefit. The ‘who’ is an interesting proposition and I will expand on this later in this article.
This drug had been prolific in the USA; however, the US had curtailed the drug substantially by addressing the precursors, ‘Bath salts’ or ‘Condy’s Crystals.’
“Immediate effects of euphoria, feelings of invulnerability, extreme stimulation, and a loss of inhibitions
Increased heart rate or irregular heart rate, increased blood pressure and increased potential for heart attack or stroke
• Increased body temperature, increased perspiration, and increased potential for dehydration
• Respiratory distress or renal failure
• Muscle spasms, tremors, and seizures
• Significant brain swelling may occur in some
• Issues with insomnia and a loss of appetite
• Increased anxiety, panic attacks, aggressive behaviour, self-mutilation, and suicidality
• Psychosis (experiencing hallucinations and or delusions) and severe delirium
o Delirium occurring as a result of Flakka may initially be hallucinations, hyperactivity, confusion, and disorientation; however, some people also develop a hypoactive delirium, often referred to as a “zombie-like state,” where the person is catatonic, not responsive, and may be hallucinating, delusional, or significantly confused
• Overdose and death
• Marked neurological damage in chronic users.”
Critically, given what is known about this drug and what the Government is doing about it (as far as we can determine very little), somebody must be held accountable.
If a group of volunteers can find this issue, surely there must be detailed plans and policies from the highly paid bureaucrats and politicians who are responsible for community health and safety. Where are they?
The CAA has very grave concerns about a number of aspects of this drug which has far wider ramifications. Sadly, these concerns do not appear to be widespread within the Government.
CAA understands that, to a degree, we are relying on conjecture and inferences, but that is what the early components of any good investigation may encounter.
A thorough investigation is needed, coupled with a swift intervention strategy.
Coupled with the limited intelligence we can gather, it appears those who are responsible for thwarting this scourge are very clearly ‘asleep at the wheel’, and that may not be just tardiness. The indicators are that there are criminal actions afoot sufficient to indicate a need for urgent and detailed investigation.
We know that the drug is simply manufactured from Condy’s Crystals, and there is a myriad of lawful uses for this product, such as a bath for aching feet, water sanitisation, as an antibiotic and other applications throughout industry.
This, in part, makes the humble crystals a harlequin drug of sorts.
Another drug with similar and sometimes more extreme outcomes than Flakka is Spice. in the UK, Black Mamba originated in Africa but is now widespread across the globe and the mother of all bad drugs Krokodil widespread in Russia, with some suggestions it has moved elsewhere as well.
Krokodil has such shocking side effects we will not publish available photos as they are too grotesque. This drug effectively dissolves the flesh surrounding injections sights, with large pieces of flesh litereally dropping off the addict.
It seems most of the addicts of these drugs have only a life expectancy of two years at most.
All these drugs have two things in common, they can be manufactured from legal everyday products, and their use is catastrophic. One drug, Spice, was sold legally over the counter in the UK for quite a period until it was discovered the harmless pick-me-up had serious capabilities.
Because these drugs are predominantly used overseas, it would be naivety in the extreme to dismiss the issue, as it won’t come here. That was probably the view when Flakka first appeared elsewhere.
From the street, it is alleged that Flakka has piqued the interest of Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs’ (OMCGs).
OMCGs, some officials and politicians reassuringly claim, are under control in Victoria by the Victorian version of Anti Association Laws used to manage these criminal gangs interstate.
The Victorian version has so many loopholes that, no matter what we are told, OMCG members have flocked to Victoria because the laws here are ineffective. We understand OMCGs see Victoria as the place to do business. That alone tells the efficacy of the Victorian Legislation.
The CAA asks where the proof is that the Criminal Organisations Control Act 2012 works.
A common denominator for this seismic shift of criminality is the Anti Association Laws legislated and enforced in all the other States that clearly work.
It has been well-publicised that the Victorian Government has refused to introduce similar Anti Association Legislation, https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/victoria-police-repeatedly-pushed-government-to-fix-antibikie-laws/ and we note that some of the more political appointments within Victoria Police are supporting the Government’s claims that the current legislation is sufficient.
If that is so, perhaps an explanation of the OMCG influx into Victoria could be offered. The CAA suspects that this influx has bought Flakka with it.
Intelligence from the street is that the OMCGs control Flakka. That is interesting because why would the Government not be prepared to step in and take action against the OMCGs and the drug?
Perhaps it is the money trail.
Flakka will generate huge incomes for the OMCGs, and we have already seen OMGs are intricately entwined with some Unions and, by extension, the Government.
Is this why there are no effective Anti-Association Laws here and resistance to strengthen them?
One wonders where the money trail leads.
The CAA is strongly advocating for a swift response but suspects there are too many with too much to gain for this to happen.
Moreover, what of the Safe Injecting rooms? Will they accept or reject Flakka addicts with all their risks or shunt them out into the community like other addicts that misbehave?
‘It was claimed by Victoria Police that the G-Tag proposal submitted in 2016 was assessed and piloted, however, the pilot was not of this proposal but a proposal with similarities that seemed suspiciously like a cover for a feasibility assessment for a commercial venture.
The G-tag has a far wider application, and the pilot did not facilitate testing of the concept.
Police at the time did not have the capacity to grasp the concept and to their discredit never bothered to check with the authors for clarity.
The current administration of VicPol seems more adroit than past administrations, and we hope for the benefit of all Victorians that they seriously consider this proposal.’
– The G-Tag
Save Lives Reduce crime Cost positive and Make Victoria a leader as an innovative State.
Introduction
For many people, their car is their most important and valued asset, and to have it stolen is devastating. Unfortunately, motor cars, whether stolen or not, are also commonly associated with crimes including hit-run, robbery, drugs, rape, murder, domestic violence and now Terrorism.
The relatively new experience of motor vehicles being used as a weapon either against Police or as a weapon of mass destruction, terror-related or not, is a recent phenomenon. However, the introduction of this new level of violence In the West has brought a new urgency to the G-Tag.
The G-Tag, when fully implemented, is the only stratagem that will stop vehicles from being used as weapons.
The Bourke Street massacre should be justification alone for introducing the G-Tag. Unless you live under a rock, we know that it will only be a matter of time before we experience the devastation of truck or car bombs, as is all too common elsewhere in the world.
The multiple killings, countless injuries, millions of dollars of theft and massive damage is caused because current legislation is focused exclusively on the driver, not the vehicle. Until that changes, the vehicles available to drivers will continue to wreak havoc.
The most creative solution dreamed up thus far by Government and Police in Melbourne is strategically placed bollards and reinforced concrete planters. A little underwhelming. They will create safe areas (but only from cars). Still, the vulnerability of people will then be focused on the areas unable to be protected, including every intersection in Melbourne at peak pedestrian times when pedestrians in large numbers cross are exposed.
There were 4,567,314 vehicles (ABS Data and includes all vehicles) Registered in Victoria in 2015 – a huge and valuable state asset that needs to be protected.
The traditional view is the risks posed by the motor car should be managed by legislation focusing on the driver. Unfortunately, the success of this approach is problematic at best, with very limited success.
‘The best way to reduce any crime is to increase in the perpetrators’ mind the likelihood that they will get caught – penalties in themselves have limited impact because the perpetrator does not commit the act to get caught and never expects to get caught.
When the probability of being caught fails to dissuade, we need the ability to intervene to minimise the impact of the behaviour.
Authorities (Police) should be able to safely slow down or stop particular vehicles in the interests of public safety and/or lawenforcement,’
Without diminishing the current Law and Order response, there is a need to think through and discuss alternatives – that alternative is the vehicle.
GPS Tracking
GPS tracking is widely used in the community; the devices record and re-transmit their own location to a satellite-based global positioning system. These re-transmitted signals allow the identification of the vehicle, location, and route it has and is taking. It also communicates the vehicles speed.
That route can be recorded for days or weeks, and capable of identifying which vehicle was driven in a particular location at a previous time. This ability will allow Police to identify the vehicle used in a crime. As important as the current location of the vehicle, is the historical routes the vehicle has taken, which perhaps has more investigative value.
An example, and there are many, would be a drive-by shooting in the early hours. Witnesses can usually supply the time of the shots; with a G-Tag, the Police could identify which vehicles were driven in that location at the time given.
Central to this proposal will be the fitting of tracking devices to every vehicle. Although this forms part of the first stage of this proposal, it needs to be seen through the prism of advantages to the community, a safety and Crime Prevention/Minimisation strategy, albeit that an economic case may be produced for the system raising alternative revenue streams for the Government, a user pays system for registration. The latter is the most equitable method of raising revenue.
Setting the case for part one of this proposal – the G-Tag
The advantages of developing a GPS locating system, or G-Tag, for the entire Victorian road fleet will be no small feat; however, the return will be enormous.
Theft of Motor vehicles and machinery –
With a G-Tag, stolen vehicles can be located quickly; the focus is on the property, not the perpetrator, which will serendipitously lead to perpetrators being detected rapidly. This will lead to a reduction in insurance costs. This would also reduce the demand for Police time and assist in arresting perpetrators.
G-Tags will influence the perpetrators knowing the chances of getting caught have escalated and may dissuade many would-be offenders.
In Australia, 49 vehicles are stolen and processed for scrap metal a week and one in four cars stolen are never recovered – $103 Million estimated value of cars never recovered. In addition, there are estimated to be 5 million cars on Australian roads that do not have immobilising technology. (Source -National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council.).
In Victoria, 14366 vehicle thefts were reported according to VicPol statistics – in 2014. In 2015 that number increased to 17090, an increase of 19%. The National average of vehicles not recovered is 31% (This figure could be substantially higher when including vehicles recovered damaged beyond repair – burnt out etc.) so extrapolating those figures to Victoria, over 5000 vehicles disappear every year, or nearly 100 every week.
What the statistics do not show is the hardship caused and the danger posed to the community
Community safety – a G-Tag will assist
Victims of Domestic violence-. They can be better protected by tagging perpetrators’ vehicles in the G-Tag system to warn Police of the perpetrator heading toward the victim. In addition, using postcodes to quarantine victims will enable Police to intervene when postcode boundaries are crossed by perpetrators breaching a Family Violence Order—alerting Police to reduce the risk to the victim.
Missing Persons-. G-Tags can locate vehicles of missing persons before self-harm. Suicidal victims are generally found after their demise when the family have contacted Police over concerns, but Police driving around searching every nook and cranny has historically been demonstrated as ineffective and usually does not end in locating the individual before it is too late.
G-Tags will have the ability to save lives with the chance of getting professional help to desperate people.
Rural application- The application in Rural and remote Victoria is very sound; consider being able to locate a tractor on a large remote property or a driver overdue to destinations, particularly in times of natural disaster. This will also reduce the number of unnecessary searches.
The applications of G-Tag technology can be extended to include watercraft and recreational vehicles.
Technology instead of human resources. The thousands of man-hours expended by emergency services, particularly Police, can be dramatically reduced in multiple circumstances by the G-Tag Policing will become more efficient and effective, reducing pressure on Police resources.
Criminal activity – Terrorism Investigations would have the advantage of monitoring vehicles with G-Tags without intrusion to better understand the risks posed by suspects.
The use of vehicles as a weapon in Terrorism is commonplace in the current war zones. It is likely to appear in Australia at some stage and being prepared will save lives.
Criminal Behaviour –There is a current spate of home invasions where perpetrators physically confront victims in their homes by forced entry to gain access to keys to steal high-end motor vehicles. This type of activity (home invasion) is on the rise; there is a substantial risk of serious harm, if not the death of a victim. The ability to track these vehicles by G-Tag and immobilise them is very attractive to the victims and Police.
Illicit Drugs must be transported in vehicles at some stage. Access to G-Tag technology will provide invaluable assistance in managing the importation and trafficking of drugs.
Hoon drivers –can be monitored and removed from our roads. Known hoons’ vehicles can be tagged in the G-Tag system, and an alarm indicating when like tagged vehicles are identified by the system to be congregating can give Police the opportunity to intervene before the dangers escalate.
Police Pursuits – This technology virtually eliminates the need for pursuits, and G-Tag disabling the car by G-Tag reduces risk to the Community, the Police and even the offender.
Emergency vehicles – can easily and reliably be located and managed when civil emergencies occur. E.g. incident managers could recognise the precise locations of fire appliances during bushfire outbreaks to direct them to where they are most needed – or away from impending danger.
Arial surveillance – Currently undertaken by the Police Airwing, there are limitations with availability and response times. The G-Tag will not replace the need for Arial Surveillance as a Policing tool. Still, the G-Tag will significantly enhance the effectiveness of the Air Wing, reducing operating costs.
Legal implications – The data recorded in the G-Tag system has evidentiary value, as do E-Tags and Security Cameras. The potential for the improved data available from G-Tags will provide data of strong evidentiary value for Prosecution and Defence in equal benefit, further improving our judicial system.
Revenue streams
The advantage of this system is it would allow the Government to use this mechanism to charge registrations on a user-pay basis, the most equitable mechanism. In addition, implementing part two of this proposal would eliminate the need for enforcement of recalcitrant individuals by placing the vehicle in ‘limp home’ mode until the financial liabilities are met. This capacity could also be extended to other civil liabilities related to traffic.
Setting the case for Part 2 of this proposal using G-Tag.
The first part of this proposal using converted E-Tag’s will only reach a percentage of the Victorian fleet unless a case can be presented for voluntary take-up of G-Tags based on the E-Tag system, although not totally limiting will reduce the overall potential of the program. However, the advantage of converting E-Tags to G-Tags will ensure a rapid introduction to the program.
Part 2 introduces more sophisticated G-Tags (technology is currently available) that are hard-wired into the vehicle’s electronics and fitted where they cannot be easily removed or interfered with. This technology adds a new layer where the vehicle’s electronics can be activated remotely to put the vehicle into limp home mode (reducing its top speed to 80KPH) before activating the engine immobiliser to halt the vehicle. The only limitations will be that certain vehicles do not have the limp home mode and would be stopped at a safe place or shut down when stationary.
The upgraded G-Tags would need to be fitted to all new vehicles, pre-delivery (amending Vehicle Standards)and second-hand vehicles as part of the roadworthy process. In addition, a moratorium would be required to set a reasonable time that all vehicles must comply, similar to other safety initiatives, including seat belt introduction.
Stage 2 will allow Police to intervene to stop the commission or continuance of a crime, which is the primary role of the Police.
The issue of re-establishing the vehicle’s functionality when recovered, or is no longer a threat, is again a technical issue that should not prove insurmountable. If it can be switched off, it can be switched back on; it is just a matter of protocols.
The cost debate
There is a cost, but as this is an innovation, the technology development costs of G-Tag would be well offset by marketing the initiative interstate and overseas. In addition, a fee for service arrangement, assisting set up and a fee for intellectual property would generate substantial income.
Part of the development costs could be covered by the Insurance Industry and TAC, who both stand to gain considerably. In addition, there would be nominal cost recovery from the users in installing a device into the existing fleet – manufacturers would be required to fit the device pre-delivery on all new vehicles.
An offset to the toll operator’s contribution (modifying E-Tags)will be the income generated when tracking devices are fitted to the Victorian fleet to include the E-Tag function in the G-Tag, effectively the E-Tag would be redundant.
With savings achieved to the State economy, the overall cost will be well offset. In addition, recurring fees would be partly recovered by beneficiaries, namely Insurance companies, Toll operators, TAC and the user.
Car owners will have to bear some costs, subsidised for Welfare recipients, but the price should not be prohibitive, somewhere under $200.
The proposal to introduce a pay-as-you-use system for registration, third-party and comprehensive Insurance and fuel excise currently avoided by the increased uptake of Electric Vehicles will contribute to the setup and recurring cost of the system.
The system could, therefore, potentially protect innocent victims from financial hardship due to vehicle damage – Potentially, the initiative could be cost-positive.
Technology
Anybody who owns a smartphone or has a Satellite navigation device is acutely aware of the power and application of technology.
Currently advertised on the internet for $35 is a tracking device that can be attached to a vehicle and linked to a smartphone. The technology exists and is small and relatively cheap.
With the increasing sophistication of motor vehicles and their reliance on computers to manage their engines, an opportunity exists to intervene in a vehicle’s performance. A large part (and increasing) of the Victorian fleet are vehicles that have an inbuilt “Limp Home Mode” in their computer systems designed to protect the engine from further damage should a fault be detected
It is a matter of connecting the dots.
If we can identify a vehicle using GPS locating technology by a G-Tag, we only need to develop a mechanism to access the vehicle’s computer via the G-Tag to activate the “Limp Home Mode” or the vehicle” Immobilisation technology”. A SIM card is the solution.
By designing and fitting an aftermarket, G-Tag to attach to the vehicle’s electronics, the vehicle’s function can be remotely managed.
The power supply for the G-Tag is then secured for the vehicle’s life.
The simplest method to communicate with vehicle electronics is by a SIM card in the device using the mobile network to communicate with the car’s computer.
The Issue of Privacy
In the 1980s, a very vocal minority saw themselves as the keepers of our privacy, objecting to installing the eight CCTV cameras for a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Melbourne. They vocalised on the prying eyes and the abuse that would occur should the cameras not be removed immediately after the conference was finished- “It’s a Police State” was the group’s mantra.
Their plaintive cries are now somewhat humorous when we look around at the number of cameras that watch us daily, but there is no community concern as it has been demonstrated that they serve the greater good, and law-abiding citizens do not care if they are watched. Indeed, governments actively encourage more expansive use of CCTV in public places, and the take-up of private CCTV systems – including those monitoring public spaces – is impressive.
This initiative has a distinct advantage over CCTV cameras. The Cameras have a deterrent effect and assist with identifying perpetrators, but they cannot stop or prevent the continuation of a crime – the G-Tag can.
Anybody worried about the movement of their vehicle being monitored should realise there are over 5 million vehicles in Victoria, so nobody would have the time, the resources or the interest to monitor every vehicle – it will be enough just monitoring vehicles that are of particular interest- law-abiding citizens just hide in the crowd.
Furthermore, although not common knowledge, most high-end vehicles sold in recent years already have this technology and are used as part of the aftermarket service provided by the manufacturers as a mechanism to update electronics and identify the need for roadside assistance.
Effectively a reasonable percentage of the population drive around oblivious that their movements are being or are capable of being monitored by a third part.
Impact on Judicial processes.
Implementing this system will provide the Judiciary with an alternative to sentencing offenders (by regulating vehicle use), particularly for the less serious traffic infringements and criminal activity in some cases.
Currently, lives are ruined financially and otherwise by fines and driving restrictions that cause offenders to lose employment and the capacity to pay fines.
Unintended double jeopardy can ruin many young people’s lives. Correcting bad behaviour by bad outcomes lessens, and in certain circumstances destroys the chance of future compliance. Instead, in desperation, it can lead, particularly young people, towards crime and drugs to escape what they see as a hopeless situation from which they see no escape.
The G-Tag system can be used to manage the use of a vehicle to certain roads and/or times to allow Offenders to continue in employment, enabling them to pay the fines but still having their mobility curtailed to serve as a punishment.
We are not suggesting this facility become run-of-the-mill but for cases where a driver may exceed .05 after a reading shows residual alcohol or drugs in the low range. Or where breaches of Licence offences and registration matters can be managed without ruining lives.
The increase in penalty recovery would justify offenders retaining employment and avoid forcing people onto welfare and damaging the States productivity.
Recovery of Civil compliance fines could also be improved. For example, a vehicle disabled by G-Tag would rapidly encourage compliance.
System Security
There will need to be legislation that includes safeguards for privacy and safeguards against tampering with the system, either the physical equipment or any signal emitted.
Conclusion
The G-Tag is a proactive and novel proposal, but there is a myriad of far more radical ideas that once seemed farfetched that are now accepted as the mainstream norm, world wide web, television and the telephone!
We now accept security cameras as a way of life and the dreaded speed cameras as an acceptable inconvenience that serves the greater good.
It will take leadership and innovative thought to implement this proposal; however, the advantages to the community make it a worthwhile project.
This is an innovation that will save lives commensurate with its implementation,
Minimise Police pursuits by number and duration.
Enable the arrest of mobile criminals safely.
Monitor criminal activity.
Determine the identity of perpetrators when the crime was not witnessed, but a vehicle was involved (historical footage of the scene)
Tag domestic violence perpetrators and protect victims with an electronic shield.
Reducing a criminal’s ability to use a vehicle in committing a crime.
Reducing criminals’ ability to burn stolen vehicles to hide DNA.
Locate missing people intent on self-harm.
Increase revenue through greater enforcement of civil compliance.
Locate and save people in natural disasters.
Reduce police resources in trying to locate missing persons.
“I have worked hard to own my car, and if it gets stolen, I would be very happy that it could be located and disabled as soon as it is reported (minimising damage to it). It would be a bonus that the low life that did it was caught.”
A view that the overwhelming majority of Victorians would share.
An additional attraction of this technology is that it will allow a user-pays system to be developed in lieu of registration and other taxes as a reliable and equitable mechanism to tax road users.
Recommendation
That VicPol and Government establish a working party to prepare the business case for this proposal, including the fiscal imperatives that will make this proposal not only practical but cost positive. An approach ANZPAA and Standards Australia should be considered as well as drafting legislation to establish a G-Tag Authority to develop the technology and design the model for the ongoing management and operation of the system.
In the latest strike in what can only be described as a media blitz, the IBAC Commissioner has again attempted to interpret the law.
The integrity entities are not only colour coding corruption (Grey), but now the texture is apparently relevant.
This is in addition to attempting to create new definitions for words.
In this latest attempt by the IBAC Commissioner to influence the way laws are managed, he put forward ‘Soft’ corruption as an apparent legal reality rather than a Commissioner’s wish to divert attention from the inability of IBAC to perform its function to avoid accountability for IBAC’s failures.
Since when does the texture or colour of a law determine or influence its application?
As part of the Commissioners media blitz, on October the 22nd, it was reported in the Herald Sun that he warned,
‘Victoria’s corruption watchdog has warned the centralisation of power around Premier Daniel Andrews’ private office has created an environment ripe for “soft corruption”.’
This tinkering around with how our Laws are supposed to work must stop.
The Coate Inquiry’s ludicrous ‘Creeping Assumptions’ theory,
IBAC’s and Ombudsman’s definition of ‘immersed’,
The suggestions of ‘grey’ corruption,
And now the IBAC Commissioners ‘soft’ corruption
We can only assume that Soft corruption must be akin to the Claytons Theory, famously described as – “the drink you have when you’re not having a drink”.
There is one common underlying explanation for these inane references – incompetence.
The apparent strategy is, ‘Whatever you do, shift the focus from your incompetence.’
Based on the observations proffered by our integrity organisations, we could therefore categorise other crimes into grey or soft as a pre-emptive justification for lack of effective prosecutions or the need even to address these breaches of the law.
Can you imagine people using terms like ‘grey’ assault, ‘immersed’ in a breach of an intervention order or ‘soft’ drink driving’? According to the integrity guardians, only corruption can be dealt with under these new nuances.
This nonsense needs to be walked back. Corruption is corruption, and it is not subject to colour or textural variations.
We believe this attempt to change the corruption landscape is part of IBAC’s flawed understanding of its role. IBAC is NOT a court. We note that this is the way IBAC identifies itself on its website:
The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) is Victoria’s agency responsible for preventing and exposing public sector corruption and police misconduct. Our jurisdiction covers state and local government, police, parliament and the judiciary.
This is clearly about preventing or exposing, not defining, determining or justifying. It appears IBAC is straying from its own stated purpose in attempting to justify not referring matters for prosecution.
Surprisingly, neither the Judiciary nor the Government has not pulled IBAC into line and reminded the Commissioner that IBAC is not a Judicial body.
This State’s failure to detect and prevent corruption is not served well by an IBAC intent on trying to become an adjunct to the legal system instead of an essential and independent part.
Instead of worrying about the hue or texture of the corruption is; how about detecting and referring perpetrators for prosecution?
Instead of asking for money, we, the community, would like to see some tangible results for the millions we already spend on what seems an increasingly out-of-touch IBAC.
In the latest strike in what can only be described as a media blitz, the IBAC Commissioner has again attempted to interpret the law.
The integrity entities are not only colour coding corruption (Grey), but now the texture is apparently relevant.
This is in addition to attempting to create new definitions for words.
In this latest attempt by the IBAC Commissioner to influence the way laws are managed, he put forward ‘Soft’ corruption as an apparent legal reality rather than a Commissioner’s wish to divert attention from the inability of IBAC to perform its function to avoid accountability for IBAC’s failures.
Since when does the texture or colour of a law determine or influence its application?
As part of the Commissioners media blitz, on October the 22nd, it was reported in the Herald Sun that he warned,
‘Victoria’s corruption watchdog has warned the centralisation of power around Premier Daniel Andrews’ private office has created an environment ripe for “soft corruption”.’
This tinkering around with how our Laws are supposed to work must stop.
The Coate Inquiry’s ludicrous ‘Creeping Assumptions’ theory,
IBAC’s and Ombudsman’s definition of ‘immersed’,
The suggestions of ‘grey’ corruption,
And now the IBAC Commissioners ‘soft’ corruption
We can only assume that Soft corruption must be akin to the Claytons Theory, famously described as – “the drink you have when you’re not having a drink”.
There is one common underlying explanation for these inane references – incompetence.
The apparent strategy is, ‘Whatever you do, shift the focus from your incompetence.’
Based on the observations proffered by our integrity organisations, we could therefore categorise other crimes into grey or soft as a pre-emptive justification for lack of effective prosecutions or the need even to address these breaches of the law.
Can you imagine people using terms like ‘grey’ assault, ‘immersed’ in a breach of an intervention order or ‘soft’ drink driving’? According to the integrity guardians, only corruption can be dealt with under these new nuances.
This nonsense needs to be walked back. Corruption is corruption, and it is not subject to colour or textural variations.
We believe this attempt to change the corruption landscape is part of IBAC’s flawed understanding of its role. IBAC is NOT a court. We note that this is the way IBAC identifies itself on its website:
The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) is Victoria’s agency responsible for preventing and exposing public sector corruption and police misconduct. Our jurisdiction covers state and local government, police, parliament and the judiciary.
This is clearly about preventing or exposing, not defining, determining or justifying. It appears IBAC is straying from its own stated purpose in attempting to justify not referring matters for prosecution.
Surprisingly, neither the Judiciary nor the Government has not pulled IBAC into line and reminded the Commissioner that IBAC is not a Judicial body.
This State’s failure to detect and prevent corruption is not served well by an IBAC intent on trying to become an adjunct to the legal system instead of an essential and independent part.
Instead of worrying about the hue or texture of the corruption is; how about detecting and referring perpetrators for prosecution?
Instead of asking for money, we, the community, would like to see some tangible results for the millions we already spend on what seems an increasingly out-of-touch IBAC.
Robert Redlich, please cut it out; you are embarrassing yourself and IBAC.
The IBAC Commissioner has recently taken to the media to argue a case for increased powers and funding for IBAC, inferring that the lack of these is the cause of their failures. They may well be contributors, but, just as with many other Government Officials, the mantra of ‘it’s not my/our fault’ is commonplace and the go-to defence to explain their failures.
When our integrity regulator will not take responsibility for maintaining the bar for integrity, it is little wonder nobody in Government will either.
That may well be the primary cause of IBAC’s failure.
Redlich’s media comments seemed like a thinly veiled crack at the Premier. We would remind the Commissioner that he did have the Premier in his’ cross hairs’, but he and the Ombudsman lifted the barrel as the shot was fired.
Being “Immersed” in the ‘Red Shirts’ artifice was the justification for no adverse finding against the Premier, and, with that, a new definition of the word was spawned.
If your Webster’s is not working for you, try your Funk and Wagnall.
It is time for you, Mr Redlich, and your Deputy to demonstrate true integrity and resign by example.
Things have not been too flash for you both in recent times.
Victoria’s Parliamentary Integrity and Oversight Committee released its report on the 6th of October 2022 relating to Public Examinations by IBAC. It can be argued that the report is a very significant slap down for Commissioner Redlich and Deputy Commissioner Wolf.
Both have sought to increase the frequency and availability of Public Examinations,’ Show Trials’, but they could not explain ‘unreasonable damage’, a concept central to the current justification for IBAC to conduct a public examination. A notion the average person would have no problem explaining.
“This is concerning to the (Parliamentary) Committee, particularly considering that Commissioner Redlich and Deputy Commissioner Wolf were unable to provide a clear explanation in the public hearing of the concept of ‘unreasonable damage’ and how IBAC determines what is ‘unreasonable’,” – Herald Sun-6/10/22
With this finding, the Committee has nailed the major anomaly in our integrity processes: Bureaucrats with unfettered power and no accountability to the principles of justice.
There could be an argument that it is the Parliament’s responsibility to set out what ‘unreasonable damage’ might mean by way of a definition. Still, IBAC has been applying a definition (or is supposed to have been) to all public examinations to date. Hence, it is totally reasonable for the Committee to ask what their definition might be and be critical because they cannot explain something they have been supposed to be regularly doing.
This also reflects equally poorly on the Victorian Inspectorate, which oversees IBAC and is not performing its task well either.
While Redlich and Wolf seek to gain more power, the Committee is wise enough to halt their power grab.
The CAA strongly believes that Public Examinations are abhorrent and should only be used in the rarest of circumstances, and should never be used to replace competent investigative skills and processes.
The CAA is not challenging the Coercive Powers already available to IBAC, just the ‘show’ part.
The Committee has sent IBAC to the naughty corner to do some homework.
“The committee, which currently has a majority of Labor MPs, recommended legislative changes that require the watchdog to draw up new guidelines clearly spelling out how to decide when this damage is unfair to the person being interviewed.” – Herald Sun -6/10/22
This is a bit like getting the fox to design the security for a hen house, risking devious accesses being installed in the design.
There is, however, a relatively straightforward solution to this issue.
IBAC or any other agencies with these powers should be required to apply to a Court for an Order to examine a witness publicly.
Hearings would allow the witness to challenge the Integrity Body to justify its application.
Remove the power from the Bureaucrats who, by the Committee’s findings, do not understand a fundamental principle like “unreasonable damage”, something one would not even need a Law Degree to understand.
Without being legislated, it should be possible for the bureaucrats, who in this case are both lawyers, to understand the concept of ‘unreasonable’.
However, as they cannot or will not, the Courts must determine the answer for each case; simply legislating a definition will not work, as what may be unreasonable in one case may not be in another.
The Courts can place any restrictions on the examination that it sees serves the best interest of the Law and maintains natural justice for the witness.
We argue that the Public Examination ‘Show Trial’ process is used as punishment or more damming, where poor investigations fail.
Moreover, the chance of a fair trial may well be compromised by public examination where the rules of evidence vary from what a court will permit in a subsequent trial, influencing potential jurors; a risk we should not countenance.
The transparency argument often put forward is also flawed as the logical corollary would be for people before being charged with murder, or other crimes should be publicly examined – an illogical and unacceptable proposition.
There is an argument that ‘Show Trials’ may elicit more evidence against a witness, which has allegedly happened in a few cases.
Former Queensland Police Commissioner Terry Lewis was convicted for corruption in 1991, and Politician Eddie Obeid likewise in New South Wales in 2021. Cases separated by thirty years and in different States are hardly a ringing endorsement for the benefits of ‘Show Trials’ or their usefulness in reducing corruption.
The CAA is not convinced that, although the additional evidence in these two matters may have been important, their subsequent convictions would have hinged on this information alone. We would expect a compelling case would have existed anyway; if not, it should have been with competent investigation.
Fundamental maxims that underpin our legal system diametrically contradict public examinations, arguably the 21st-century version of medieval stocks; punishment without trial.
No less of a luminary than Benjamin Franklin, a founding father of the United States in 1785, said,
” That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.”
Franklin was echoing Voltaire, pseudonym of François-Marie Arouet, recognised as one of the greatest French writers (circa)1749 who wrote.
“that generous Maxim, that ’tis much more Prudence to acquit two Persons, tho’ actually guilty, than to pass Sentence of Condemnation on one that is virtuous and innocent.”
And further, Sir William Blackstone, in his commentaries on the Laws of England in 1783, said,
“For the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer.”
The numbers quoted by these luminaries are immaterial; the Maxim they promote is the key.
The argument for this Maxim is compelling and has stood the test of time, and should not be set aside.
The public examination of witnesses by Corruption Agencies contradicts this Maxim.
Otto Von Bismarck, a former Chancellor of the German Reich, was generally attributed with laying the foundation for the first and second world wars and expressed the opposing view.
“it is better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape.”
Proponents of the Public examinations tend to favour the Bismarck philosophy, and we are strongly inclined to the Franklin/Voltaire/Blackstone view.
The issue of not using the Police Force and its skills and resources to tackle corruption (crime) in the public sector seems ludicrous and if there is a problem that renders the Police Force unsuitable, then fix the Police Force.
If corruption (crime) is suspected, no matter who it is in the public employ, then the Police need to be the primary investigators.
If the Police need the support of coercive powers currently available to IBAC, a minor amendment to the Major Crime (Investigative Powers) Act 2004. This would allow Police, on the authority of the Supreme Court, to defer to the Public Examiner, who has and can exercise coercive powers; there is a compelling argument that corruption is a Major crime and should fall within the purview of the Public Examiner.
There will always be a need for an independent Authority to manage corruption involving Police. But such an authority, not saddled with general crimes committed by those on the public payroll, would be more cost-effective.
Victoria’s Parliamentary Integrity and Oversight Committee’s deliberations were motivated by the untimely death of a witness subjected to a ‘Show Trial’. Mistakes like this are completely unjustifiable under any circumstances.
That the Committee exposed that IBAC management could not explain the simple concept of what ‘unreasonable damage’ might be, is damming and highlights a need to consider if IBAC is fit for purpose.
The lack of tangible outcomes is another issue to be addressed. The very last thing we need is empire-building in this space – results would be more appropriate.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
