VICTORIA POLICE A DISASTER

VICTORIA POLICE A DISASTER

In a hugely embarrassing turn of events, Acting Chief Commissioner Rick Nugent has announced he will not be applying for the top job after being hand-picked and parachuted into the acting role.

As disappointed as many of us are in his decision, he may well have done Victoria Police and Victoria a considerable service, highlighting and shining a light on the role and failures of Victoria Police Command, forcing the State to take a new approach to selecting its senior executives because by any measure the current process is an abject failure as history shows.

Without major surgery on this selection process, it will be like the adage of ‘doing the same thing tomorrow and expecting a different result’: the definition of insanity.

To fully understand the failure of Police Command, we need to look no further than the Police Oath of Office that all Serving Police, irrespective of rank, must take and abide by, but as history has now shown us, this oath only applies to some within the organisation when it suits them and is breached with regular monotony when it doesn’t.

The VICTORIA POLICE ACT 2013 – Schedule 2— sets out the Police Oaths and affirmations and has four key points within that oath.

The Oath commits Police to perform their duties in a particular manner,

  1. …without favour or affection, malice or ill-will,
  2. …will see and cause the peace to be kept and preserved,
  3. …will prevent to the best of my power all offences,
  4. …will, to the best of my skill and knowledge, discharge all the duties legally imposed on me faithfully and according to law.

When applying these key points to the performance of Police Command over several years, the score is abysmal and indicates many examples of wanton disregard for this Oath.

We are not suggesting that all Police commanders have been tainted over the last two decades, but the buck stops with the Chief Commissioner and the Command team. They bear ultimate responsibility for the performance and activities of the organisation, but the litany of breaches from which there have been no repercussions against those responsible is staggering. Adding to the dearth of leadership, unbelievably, many police directly involved in these issues have since been promoted.

How can we have a Police Force where poor performance is rewarded?

The following list is accompanied by the number allocated to each part of the Oath above.

  • A Chief Commissioner, as the then State Disaster Coordinator, having dinner with friends while Victoria burnt and Victorians were dying. A State disaster with the coordinator missing. Deserting her post in a crisis.(4),
  • A Chief Commissioner accepting free flights from an airline. (4)
  • The Gobbo affair. Multiple Chief Commissioners and others created, facilitated or turned a blind eye to this issue. No police were disciplined for their roles or failures, but some were promoted to high ranks.

The severity of the poor behaviour by Police, particularly senior members, was set out by the High Court.

[Ms Gobbo’s] actions in purporting to act as counsel for the Convicted Persons while covertly informing against them were fundamental and appalling breaches of [her] obligations as counsel to her clients and of [her] duties to the court. Likewise, Victoria Police were guilty of reprehensible conduct in knowingly encouraging [Ms Gobbo] to do as she did. They were involved in sanctioning atrocious breaches of the sworn duty of every police officer to discharge all duties imposed on them faithfully and according to law without favour or affection, malice or ill-will. As a result, the prosecution of each Convicted Person was corrupted in a manner that debased fundamental premises of the criminal justice system.

That nobody was held accountable for this debacle is part of the leadership problems in the force. How can subordinate members act professionally and ethically when they see their superiors not subject to the same rules usually applied? (1), (3), (4).

  • Stealing from the State. Two Politicians committed fraud on the state by falsely and unlawfully claiming accommodation travel expenses but were not prosecuted for the theft. (1), (3), (4).
  • The ubiquitous Red Shirts saga in 2019 failed to see any prosecutions after blatant interference in the electoral process. It should be noted that the Office of Police Integrity (OPI) decided not to prosecute, but the head of the OPI was later appointed as Chief Commissioner. (1),(2),(3),(4).
  • COVID-19 saw the worst performance of Police senior management in the force’s history, only challenged by the Gobbo Affair.

Whether it was the refusal of the Police to provide supervision of the quarantine facilities, which claimed over 800 Victorian lives, or how the community was controlled, from handcuffing a Mum in front of her children for relatively innocuous online comments, accosting old ladies sitting on a park bench, using live ammunition on people demonstrating against harsh and unrealistic restrictions, and activating ‘tea bagging’ control strategies forcing demonstrators to crowd together was the opposite of the essential medical advice for the disease. The over-the-top responses did nothing to achieve objectives other than a perverted sense of authority as displayed by the Government. The argument that the Police only applied the government health order is ridiculous. A Government cannot force a member of the Police Force to breach their Oath of Office; however, throughout the pandemic, it regularly did, and the Force Senior management chose to play along with the Government and defy and ignore their Oath of Office. No disciplinary or criminal charge was laid against breaches by the Police. Albeit that senior command neglected to follow their Oath, all police involved each had a sworn duty and should have been able to exercise their right not to breach their Oath.(1),(2),(3),(4).

  • A very Senior Officer accepting a free first-class trip to America from another Government Agency aggravated by yet another Senior Executive permitting the girlfriend of the Officer, employed by VicPol in a different department, to accompany him. The conference they were slated to attend had no relevance to their roles in VicPol. An all-expenses-paid junket. (4).
  • A social media troll outed as a senior officer using a non-de-plume to distribute foul material on social media aimed at colleagues. (4).
  • A Senior Officer castigating a junior member on social media. (4) also berating health volunteers in public (4) and instigating a Road Rage altercation in a school car park (4). It took so long and so many indiscretions before he was advised his contract would not be renewed. That no action was taken against this senior office was a disgrace and a poor reflection on the relevant Chief Commissioners (4).
  • Slug-gate was another disgraceful episode in Victoria’s policing of this state. The ongoing issue started with an alleged slug being placed in a food factory by a municipal health inspector, which closed the facility and caused 44 employees to lose their jobs. This was significant because it came to light that the alleged relationship between the CEO of the local council and the local Area Commander was very close, breaching professional norms. Still, no investigation was ever carried out to determine if that relationship had conspired to damage the food factory, a competitor of a new factory set up by the Government, of which the local Council CEO was a director. The principal Police officer was promoted, a common thread of miscreants in the Force.(1), (3), (4).
  • The mishandling of the ‘Bike Boy’ incident involving the wife of the former Premier showed again how the influence over the police operations was directed not by the sworn duty of Police but by some other imperative. Senior Police should have immediately become involved to ensure proper processes were followed. We are still waiting to see who will be promoted by this Police inaction.(1), (3), (4).

What does stand out in this list is the number of Police who were involved who were promoted in what has the look of quid pro quo? Protect the guilty, and you will be rewarded; by any measure, this is corruption. This seems to be part of the reason so many incompetent Police achieve exalted ranks. It’s not how good you are at your job but how good you are at protecting individuals in high Office.

There are other incidents, but what is common is that when browsing the list, the offences of Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice can be applied in nearly every case, as can Malfeasance or Misconduct in Public Office in every example, not to mention numerous disciplinary offences.

The picture painted shows the depth of criminality by senior police or, at best, the sheer incompetence of senior management in running the force. Inevitably, the applicants from VicPol will include some who have been tainted by the issue listed herein. Avoid, at all costs, ‘putting a fox in charge of the hen house’.

Poor selection processes and partisan political interference in the appointment processes have driven this.

To appoint somebody who has no direct knowledge of this particular Force and the players (knowing where the skeletons are hidden)  will flounder and fail no matter how well they’re credentialed. We can only hope that the previous poor performance of former Federal officers in executive roles in VicPol will not be repeated. Federal Police leadership has very limited, if any, experience in running a community-based force. Crime prevention, central to community-based Policing, is an anathema in Federal policing. No matter how good they are in the Federal sphere, to appoint one as Chief in Victoria will be another retrograde step.

Avoiding this advice will inevitably cause political pain no matter who is in power.

The options available to the Government in the short term are that the appointment is made via a partisan arrangement, and that should be very attractive as any failures in policing can’t be sheeted back to the government; they can still revel in Police successes.

The other option is a Police Board to oversee Police operations; it must be by partisan appointments to be effective.

The current government has some electoral difficulties and can ill afford another failure at the top of VicPol.

Repairing the Force is a massive undertaking, and the successful applicant will have their work cut out and need all the support that can be mustered. Hence, the attraction to a Board comprised of former police and civilians from a broad cross-section of the community is not dissimilar to the success of the Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA), which adopted this approach and has become a powerful voice of reason.

Many Former police are attracted to these roles as they are no longer impacted by the pressure of working politics in the police environment and all the pressure for promotion. They are still morally bound by the good ethics of Policing.

POLICE AND PSYCHOLOGISTS NEEDED IN SCHOOLS TO DEAL WITH RISING VIOLENCE, PRINCIPALS WARN

POLICE AND PSYCHOLOGISTS NEEDED IN SCHOOLS TO DEAL WITH RISING VIOLENCE, PRINCIPALS WARN

An insightful article in the Australian 1st of April 2025 by Natasha Bita, ‘bells the cat’ on the reality of the environment in our schools and why the academic levels are declining, and crime committed by young people continues to escalate both in frequency and severity.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/education/police-and-psychologists-needed-in-schools-to-deal-with-rising-violence-principals-warn/news-story/23eddf73d36353595de2c6dc73acb9dc

 It is clear that we will never make inroads into these critical issues plaguing our society without the intervention the author lays out.

It is evident that poor government management is responsible; however, not all the blame can be levelled at the politicians, as the two major agencies that can make a difference are Education and the Police.

The non-action in this space by both agencies suggests that a major problem of demarcation is clouding the judgement of both.

The Police clearly think these problems in the school are the responsibility of the Schools. While that is correct, but only to a degree; the overall responsibility for Law and Order remains unequivocally with the Police, and they have failed to give this aspect of crime prevention the attention it needs, leading to the lawlessness we now endure.

Consecutive Police administrations have deliberately stood in the way of developing effective Police-in-Schools Programs, even going as far as to develop a shadow of the program to divert criticism.

From the Educator’s perspective, they have failed to establish behavioural boundaries and enforce them, coupled with maintaining basic discipline with students and parents, which has led to that profession becoming a high risk for staff and students alike. This has led to a marked decrease in academic performance in the education system.

In many ways, we are sympathetic towards the educators.  School Principals’ have no access to police data that accumulates around a child who has committed crimes and attends a school.

For a child to receive a caution from the Police, it must be an offence for which the child accepts guilt, but they can front up to school the next day mixing with peers, and the educators are blissfully unaware of the criminality of the student who may well pose an unacceptable risk.

Moreover, the educators have no opportunity to work towards helping the child because they just don’t know.

Further to the issue of an Official Police Caution, a myth is promoted that children who are caught by Police committing a crime go to jail.

The vast majority of young children detected by Police committing a crime receive an Official Police Caution and, on many occasions, receive multiple cautions if they continue to offend. They are only then charged and brought before the Children’s Court, which is the only one that can jail a child.

There is some community concern about placing children in custody or remand, but by the time they are at risk of remand by a Court, the overwhelming majority of young people have already been cautioned on multiple occasions but chose to ignore warnings.

The warnings now from School Principals must be heeded.

The CAA is promoting the establishment a Youth Justice Panel to explore the issue and make recommendations on how the issue of Juvenile behaviour can be modified.

The need for Police in schools has never been more important than now.

THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS A “SAFER SUPPLY” OF DRUGS

THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS A “SAFER SUPPLY” OF DRUGS

Sweden, the U.K., and Canada all experimented with providing opioids to addicts. The results were disastrous. 

By Adam ZIVO

[This article was originally published in City Journal, a public policy magazine and website published by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. We encourage our readers to subscribe to them for high-quality analysis on urban issues]

 CAA Comment

Although we cannot locate a source, the saying, ‘A Drug addict is made by the age of six’ has resonance.

It does not suggest children are addicted at that age, although sadly, some are. It points to the environment and upbringing that will influence later behavioural traits. These factors are neither social class nor ethnic based; every child is vulnerable.

It is this vulnerability that must drive us to a solution that at least minimises the adverse addictive behaviour. Drug addiction and even experimentation are learnt traits, so the vulnerability can be unlearned or at least mitigated.

Providing drugs under the ‘Harm Minimisation’ or ‘Safer Supply’ is not the answer as it perpetuates the drug problem, as overseas experiences have shown.

The difficulty in controlling the Drug plague by the time a person is addicted is too late and generally ineffective, so to invoke policies of ‘Harm Minimisation’ and or ‘Safer Supply’ is a recipe for disaster.

Encouraging those who are addicts to become clean has all sorts of barriers apart from the drug addiction itself; most are addicted to the drug lifestyle without responsibility or accountability, so even if they are supplied with safer drugs, their behaviour will be unlikely to change.

We need to focus on the young and provide coping strategies and resilience, the ability to say ‘no’ would be a good starting point.

In these difficult fiscal times governments face, they will have to be pragmatic and withdraw funding from ‘Harm Minimisation projects’ and ‘Safer supply approaches and instead develop a uniform strategy across the entire education system and support parents in their efforts to develop coping skills for their children as they grow physically and mentally.

This effort will take time to have an impact, but it will not only help prevent children from experimenting with drugs but also create a better learning environment, improving the academic standards of all children and leading to more constructive lives.

***************************

Last August, Denver’s city council passed a proclamation endorsing radical “harm reduction” strategies to address the drug crisis. Among these was “safer supply,” the idea that the government should give drug users their drug of choice, for free. Safer supply is a popular idea among drug-reform activists. But other countries have already tested this experiment and seen disastrous results, including more addiction, crime, and overdose deaths. It would be foolish to follow their example.

The safer-supply movement maintains that drug-related overdoses, infections, and deaths are driven by the unpredictability of the black market, where drugs are inconsistently dosed and often adulterated with other toxic substances. With ultra-potent opioids like fentanyl, even minor dosing errors can prove fatal. Drug contaminants, which dealers use to provide a stronger high at a lower cost, can be just as deadly and potentially disfiguring.

Because of this, harm-reduction activists sometimes argue that governments should provide a free supply of unadulterated, “safe” drugs to get users to abandon the dangerous street supply. Or they say that such drugs should be sold in a controlled manner, like alcohol or cannabis—an endorsement of partial or total drug legalization.

But “safe” is a relative term: the drugs championed by these activists include pharmaceutical-grade fentanyl, hydromorphone (an opioid as potent as heroin), and prescription meth. Though less risky than their illicit alternatives, these drugs are still profoundly dangerous.

The theory behind safer supply is not entirely unreasonable, but in every country that has tried it, implementation has led to increased suffering and addiction. In Europe, only Sweden and the U.K. have tested safer supply, both in the 1960s. The Swedish model gave more than 100 addicts nearly unlimited access through their doctors to prescriptions for morphine and amphetamines, with no expectations of supervised consumption. Recipients mostly sold their free drugs on the black market, often through a network of “satellite patients” (addicts who purchased prescribed drugs). This led to an explosion of addiction and public disorder.

Most doctors quickly abandoned the experiment, and it was shut down after just two years and several high-profile overdose deaths, including that of a 17-year-old girl. Media coverage portrayed safer supply as a generational medical scandal and noted that the British, after experiencing similar problems, also abandoned their experiment.

While the U.S. has never formally adopted a safer-supply policy, it experienced something functionally similar during the OxyContin crisis of the 2000s. At the time, access to the powerful opioid was virtually unrestricted in many parts of North America. Addicts turned to pharmacies for an easy fix and often sold or traded their extra pills for a quick buck. Unscrupulous “pill mills” handed out prescriptions like candy, flooding communities with OxyContin and similar narcotics. The result was a devastating opioid epidemic—one that rages to this day, at a cumulative cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives. Canada was similarly affected.

The OxyContin crisis explains why many experienced addiction experts were aghast when Canada greatly expanded access to safer supply in 2020, following a four-year pilot project. They worried that the mistakes of the recent past were being made all over again, and that the recently vanquished pill mills had returned under the cloak of “harm reduction.”

Most Canadian safer-supply prescribers dispense large quantities of hydromorphone with little to no supervised consumption. Patients can receive up to 40 eight-milligram pills per day—despite the fact that just two or three are enough to cause an overdose in someone without opioid tolerance. Some prescribers also provide supplementary fentanyl, oxycodone, or stimulants.

Unfortunately, many safer-supply patients sell or trade a significant portion of these drugs—primarily hydromorphone—in order to purchase more potent illicit substances, such as street fentanyl.

The problems with safer supply entered Canada’s consciousness in mid-2023, through an investigative report I wrote for the National Post. I interviewed 14 addiction physicians from across the country, who testified that safer-supply diversion is ubiquitous; that the street price of hydromorphone collapsed by up to 95 percent in communities where safer supply is available; that youth are consuming and becoming addicted to diverted safer-supply drugs; and that organized crime traffics these drugs.

Facing pushback, I interviewed former drug users, who estimated that roughly 80 percent of the safer-supply drugs flowing through their social circles was getting diverted. I documented dozens of examples of safer-supply trafficking online, representing tens of thousands of pills. I spoke with youth who had developed addictions from diverted safer supply and adults who had purchased thousands of such pills.

After months of public queries, the police department of London, Ontario—where safer supply was first piloted—revealed last summer that annual hydromorphone seizures rose over 3,000 percent between 2019 and 2023. The department later held a press conference warning that gangs clearly traffic safer supply. The police departments of two nearby midsize cities also saw their post-2019 hydromorphone seizures increase more than 1,000 percent.

The Canadian government quietly dropped its support for safer supply last year, cutting funding for many of its pilot programs. The province of British Columbia (the nexus of the harm-reduction movement) finally pulled back support last month, after a leaked presentation confirmed that safer-supply drugs are getting sold internationally and that the government is investigating 60 pharmacies for paying kickbacks to safer-supply patients. For now, all safer-supply drugs dispensed within the province must be consumed under supervision.

Harm-reduction activists have insisted that no hard evidence exists of widespread diversion of safer-supply drugs, but this is only because they refuse to study the issue. Most “studies” supporting safer supply are produced by ideologically driven activist-scholars, who tend to interview a small number of program enrollees. These activists also reject attempts to track diversion as “stigmatizing.”

The experiences of Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Canada offer a clear warning: safer supply is a reliably harmful policy. The outcomes speak for themselves—rising addiction, diversion, and little evidence of long-term benefit.

As the debate unfolds in the United States, policymakers would do well to learn from these failures. Americans should not be made to endure the consequences of a policy already discredited abroad simply because progressive leaders choose to ignore the record. The question now is whether we will repeat others’ mistakes—or chart a more responsible course.

 

 

MACHETE BAN MADNESS

MACHETE BAN MADNESS

The CAA applauds the belated ban on edged weapons (Machetes) and, like every other Victorian, demands that the ban be immediate.

There is no plausible excuse for a delay.

That a ban was not in place a long time ago beggars’ belief; however, the belated action that will take nine months before coming into effect is absolutely ridiculous; just what are the government planners thinking?

Haven’t they worked it out? It is not the weapon that is the problem. It is the idiot holding onto it.

If they seriously think that the perpetrators who use these weapons are going to show good community responsibility and put their prized weapons and symbols of power into a bin, the government planners are delusional.

For goodness’ sake, these weapons are status symbols that will disappear under their bed, not in a government bin.

And they will be replaced by Mum’s stainless-steel carver.

The Government needs to realise that banning the products altogether will only develop black market trading in the items, playing into the current black market (organised crime) marketing strategy – identify what the market wants, and if it is illegal, go for it.

This strategy works for the crooks, creating unintended consequences, as happened with tobacco. The weapons will probably be sold under the counter from the same shops.

The solution is banning the carrying of edged weapons of every description and giving the Police additional powers to search and seize, supported by mandated penalties to force the anthropomorphic magistracy, where coincidently many of our society ills are created because of their ineptitude, to undertake their role to keep us safe.

It’s not the weapon but the environment where it is located.

Mum’s stainless-steel carver could be the weapon a person is charged with possessing.

At 2.00 am, with a group of mates, the carver is as lethal as a machete and attracts the same status.

If care is not taken, the kitchen arsenal will replace the machete, and we will be no better off. The blades may be shorter, but the victim is just as dead.

It is not anti-social to own an edged weapon, but as soon as it is carried in a public place, the rules change; it’s not the weapon; it is the intended use, intimidation, attack or defence that is the issue.

When the planners grasp that concept, then they might come up with an effective solution like reviewing current legislation and, where necessary, tweaking it to provide the Police with the capacity to properly address the issue rather than being hamstrung by nice restrictive policies sponsored by the socialist elite.

Starting to think of the Police operational necessities (where the rubber hits the road) may go a long way to solving this issue.

Viewing this matter through a political prism will be the downfall of any efforts to curb unnecessary deaths and intimidation.

PROACTIVE – REACTIVE – BROKEN WINDOWS – ZERO TOLERANCE

PROACTIVE – REACTIVE – BROKEN WINDOWS – ZERO TOLERANCE

Speaking with police to try to understand the application of Proactive, Reactive, Broken Windows, or Zero tolerance policing philosophies really depends on which Police member you speak with. They will all have knowledge or an opinion, but the confusion starts when it comes to examples.

Adding to the confusion, the CAA has spoken to many senior Police, and even they can’t agree or have little understanding of the concepts, so what hope has the Constable on the street have of implementing a coherent Policing philosophy for Victoria’s Force?

On this front, the chances of the public knowing are next to zilch.

Put simply, proactive policing prevents crime, while reactive policing deals with crimes already committed.

Proactive policing

Proactive policing is often maligned and misunderstood, seen by many as the soft option and ineffective by avoiding the harsh reality of policing.

Arguably the most effective method of Policing, it cannot be successful without a Reactive function in support, not the other way around.

The assumption that Proactive policing is avoiding arrests is a long way from the reality of a good proactive strategy. A far better policing approach is needed, given the reluctance of courts to manage recidivists adequately.

The best way to understand the Proactive reactive dilemma is through examples.

One proactive strategy is instigating Police patrols in the community, which are frequent but unpredictable and highly visible. They must be conducted so that the community can become accustomed to the Police presence and can rely on the presence to become part of the community fabric. While 24-hour patrols would be challenging to manage, having frequent patrols on multiple days every week would improve community confidence.  This is where proactive policing is most effective – preventing crime before it happens.

Amongst the best examples of proactive projects were the formal Police In Schools Program (PSIP), Operation New Start and the Blue Light Disco. Frontline police developed the latter two and were not top-down initiatives, which added to their success. To deal with particular children, the three initiatives work together: Operation New Start working with the local Police member in the PSIP program to ensure the child gets to school, and Blue Light providing the child with entertainment and, if necessary, funding the child’s education.

There are a plethora of other examples ranging from working and building positive relationships with children of the next generation susceptible to unlawful behaviours to forms of communication with the community to reinforce compliance with the law as opposed to the vast majority of police resources applied to the reactive function where the police are isolated from the general public, either ensconced in vehicles (many with tinted windows) or police stations. There has been a substantial reduction in Police Station opening hours, and those that are open are neither welcoming nor convenient for the public, as security has been so overdone as to take the human factor out of Police Station interactions.

As history shows, the risk to police in a Police Station is extremely low, and the security should be commensurate with the risk.

Because the security levels are not commensurate with the risks, they adversely impact Service delivery, making it a chore to try to report a crime to a local Police Station. People are encouraged to report crime on the Police Advice line 113444- service efficiency at the cost-of-service delivery.

The phoned-in crime report has to be handled multiple times rather than the police member to whom the crime is reported at a Police Station taking responsibility for investigating the crime; the centralised reporting is inefficient writ large.

 

Reactive Policing

A reactive vehicle or foot patrol responds to a perceived or known threat to the community. It is usually targeted at a specific criminal or anti-social activity and is maintained until that threat is passed.

It is often spasmodic but fails to imbue confidence in the community over a more extended period.

We are not suggesting that reactive patrols are unimportant because they are sometimes essential, but not at the expense of proactive community patrols.

Of the Reactive strategies, probably the most contentious is the proliferation of Task Forces and special duties units, which, by design, are clearly Reactive because some criminal event/s motivates their creation and determines their function.

We were shocked to hear one of Victoria’s most senior executives claim that task forces are proactive and absolute rubbish.

Task Forces have an essential role to play, and there will always be a need for a number, but the reality in Policing in Victoria over the last decade or so is that inept leaders have automatically opted for a Task Force to solve the operational problems they face with little thought to the impact on the overall policing by removing police from the front line to fill the Task Force positions.

There seems to be a belief in the upper echelons of the Force that on most high-profile issues, where the community demands to see action, the most visible (and most straightforward) to quell community disquiet is to establish a Task Force.

A police pragmatist would see the Task Force approach, in many, but not all cases, as an inefficient use of police resources; a better approach would be to reduce crime from happening in the first place by maintaining an adequate number of Police on the front line.

Front-line members at the various Police Stations and Criminal Investigation Units providing face-to-face Police service to the community should be untouchable for other duties, not the first point of call.

Another problem with task forces is that they have no sunset clause, so they can run on for years and, in many cases, allow prime targets to continue their criminal activity uninterrupted. Targeting a crook to charge them with more serious crimes, or the equivalent of police nirvana, is sometimes ridiculous when prosecuting lesser offences more frequently will achieve a better outcome than THE BIG ONE.

The proactive patrols will still catch and charge perpetrators.

 

Broken Window Theory

A lot has been written about the Broken Windows policing philosophy, which was made famous because of its effectiveness in reducing crime in New York some years ago. The theory is as relevant today as it was when it was used in the US.

This approach has police intervening in all levels of social disorder and crime, and rather than drive or walk past anti-social behaviour; the police must intervene and, where an offence has been committed, charge the perpetrator and leave the Court to resolve the matter.

 In criminology, the broken windows theory states that visible signs of crimeantisocial behaviour and civil disorder create an urban environment that encourages further crime and disorder, including serious crimes.[1] The theory suggests that policing methods that target minor crimes, such as vandalismloiteringpublic drinking and fare evasion, help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory

James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling first introduced the broken windows theory in an article titled “Broken Windows” in the March 1982 issue of The Atlantic Monthly:

The role of police management is critical,  liaising with the appropriate authorities to keep on top of the visible signs of crime and antisocial behaviour brought to their attention by Police on the streets.

An argument that the Courts couldn’t handle an influx of minor offences is not a police problem. However, a Constable always has the discretion to issue a warning and should have the power to issue a notice to an offender to receive an official warning at a Police Station, irrespective of age. Failure to participate would automatically see the summonses or a Court Attendance Notice issued for the alleged indiscretion.

Zero Tolerance Philosophy

Of all the theories of Policing that are touted, this is one that we vehemently reject predominantly because it removes the Common Law discretion that a sworn Police Constable has to prosecute or not.

Without discretion, Police become robotic, void of compassion and their effectiveness would be severely diminished as the community would wholeheartedly reject this approach.

The CAA hopes that the new Chief Commissioner will rapidly bring the Force into balance between the Proactive and Reactive approaches, adjusting the pendulum to favour proactive policing by a small margin.

Making this change may be resisted by the uninformed, but it will be short-lived; as the adoption of proactive strategies starts to take effect, there will be positive reactions from the members. It does take a bit of time, but many of us have seen this before, as the conversion rate from reactive to proactive became a prominent strategy. The crime rate fell dramatically as the initiatives grew from the bottom up and started to have an effect.

To implement these philosophies, the Force needs to present an authoritative stance to the community, and we encourage the Chief Commissioner to dispense with the black (Salute Blue) uniform shirts allegedly designed to make the Force look tougher and return to the lighter blue shirts more consistent with other Australian police forces.

Reintroducing the compulsory wearing of the Police cap, the symbol of authority, will give the Force stature and rebuild respect in the Force.

A respected Force is an effective one.

HAS THE VICTORIA POLICE COMPLETED THE CIRCLE BACK TO THE 1930’S

HAS THE VICTORIA POLICE COMPLETED THE CIRCLE BACK TO THE 1930’S

By Newton Reynolds – CAA Member

In the 1930’s Victoria Police was moribund, corrupt and inefficient.

Chief Inspector Duncan from the Met “FLYING SQUAD” in London was tasked with a review.

He arrived in Melbourne on 12 October 1936 and commenced his review. Even before he presented his report, he informed the Government that the matter was urgent.

He was appointed Chief Commissioner and reformed the Force into arguably the best in the World.

Since the appointment of Nixon as Chief Commissioner, the force has been in a terminal state of decline. Alexander Mitchell DUNCAN’s appointment drew howls of protest from police and politicians: “Why not a local?” the reason was “there were none capable and incorruptible”.

Therefore, the search for a replacement Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police should go international.  The current crop of Assistants and Deputy Commissioners are politically tainted.  The Lawyer X, Red Shirts, the Cardinal Pell witch hunt, COVID-19 overkill, the anti-Jewish failures, the two-tiered political policing, the list goes on. They form part of a failed command.  Bring back Sir Ken Jones from the UK, remember the British Bobby who was white anted by then Chief Commissioner Simon OVERLAND, known as” the LANTERN”.  “Bright but had to be carried everywhere”.

A fresh approach to move to traditional policing and removing the Government’s sticky political fingers from law enforcement.

Building Taj Mahal-sized centralised Police Stations instead of smaller community Police Stations which, from a policing perspective, are far more effective, efficient and welcoming in connecting with their community.  Victoria Police has lost sight of its main function, which is the protection of life and property and the prevention of crime.  The force has morphed into being a reactionary arm of Government Policy

The worry is the current crop of politicians do not have the foresight or the will.

Here’s praying the next appointment will not be some POLITICAL DOG BODY more likely to also fall foul of the Force members, appointed to satisfy the equality and diversity brigade but a strong, decisive Commissioner with runs on the board in law enforcement and not tainted by recent performance in Victoria.

The immediate resignation of Chief Commissioner Shane Patton will add to the woes of VicPol and is unlikely to be the circuit breaker the Government is hoping for.

The Government needs to provide a Mea culpa on many of its poor decisions if it has any hope of even having a small influence on improving its relationship with the Police.

Rick Nugent is a good man, but that may not be good enough to turn the tide, we wish him luck.

If he has any hope of turning the tide, he will need to first rout out the rabbits of the Senior ranks, and the Government must support him in that endeavour.

IS TRUMP RIGHT THAT CANADA HAS A FENTANYL PROBLEM?

IS TRUMP RIGHT THAT CANADA HAS A FENTANYL PROBLEM?

CAA comment

This is an important article by Break the Needle and is particularly insightful in exposing our risk factors about illicit Drugs.

It highlights the folly of looking at risk factors on imports from other countries and how they may be used as a drug conduit.

Canada would be seen as a friendly neighbour to the US, which shares much in common with its northern neighbour. It is not unlike the relationship between New Zealand and Australia, so it is very possible that our border security takes less notice of imports from across the ditch than those from other Asian and friendly European countries.

Trump has cleverly used Tariffs as a weapon to have US neighbours take appropriate action against Drug and people smuggling operations.

We do not doubt that Trump would accept any adverse retaliatory action with his tariff strategy to prove that he is not bluffing.

Depending on how this strategy plays out, Australia could become the epicentre of drug use as criminal gangs unable to access or with reduced access to the US market, look further afield for a suitable market and, given the high retail price of drugs in Australia that will be where they first look.

We can only hope that our legislators are a wake-up and prepared for any onslaught because if the cat gets out of the bag, trying to rein in any influx will be extremely difficult, if not impossible.

Make our borders drug proof or we all suffer.

Trump’s tariff threat has ignited debate over Canada’s role in fentanyl trafficking. Sources say Canada is a key player.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump’s nominee for commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, caused a stir when he said Canada and Mexico could avoid 25 per cent tariffs if they stop fentanyl and illegal migrants from coming into the US.

“As far as I know, they are acting swiftly, and if they execute it, there will be no tariff,” Lutnick said at a US Senate Commerce Committee hearing.

Ottawa and several provinces have launched border security initiatives to respond to the threat of tariffs. However, there is disagreement over whether fentanyl trafficking is a legitimate issue in Canada.

Data and sources paint a complex picture. While the volume of fentanyl seizures is low, some sources indicate Canada is a hub in the global fentanyl trade.

‘Massive’

In his comments about drug trafficking at the Canadian border, Trump has focused on fentanyl specifically.

“The fentanyl coming through Canada is massive,” Trump said at a Jan. 21 press conference, where he reiterated his threat to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods.

Fentanyl claims tens of thousands of American lives each year.

In 2023, fentanyl and related drugs such as carfentanyl were responsible for an estimated 74,702 overdose deaths in the US, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid up to 50 times more potent than heroin and 100 times stronger than morphine, making even minor border seizures significant. A potentially lethal dose is just two milligrams — roughly the size of a few grains of salt.

The U.S. Border Patrol and the Office of Field Operations recorded the seizure of 19.5 kg of fentanyl along the entire US-Canada border in 2024. This is a tiny fraction of the nearly 10,000 kilograms of fentanyl seized across all US borders last year.

Of this haul, 9,600 kg was confiscated at the southern border with Mexico, where Mexican cartels are known for mass-producing the drug.

The Canada Border Services Agency seized just 4.9 kg of fentanyl between Jan. 1 and Oct. 31, 2024. Of this number, 4.1 kg was intercepted before it could be smuggled overseas, specifically toward the Netherlands, agency spokesperson Jacqueline Roby told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement.

However, during this period, the agency seized about 21,500 kg of “other drugs, narcotics and precursor chemicals,” Roby said. Precursor chemicals refer to substances that are not explicitly identified as fentanyl but may include drugs and chemicals used in the production of fentanyl.

‘Limited to no evidence’

A spokesperson for the Ontario RCMP said Canada-produced fentanyl trafficking at the US-Canada border is not a significant issue.

“There is limited to no evidence or data from law enforcement agencies in the U.S. or Canada to support the claim that Canadian-produced fentanyl is an increasing threat to the U.S.,” the spokesperson said.

“Reports state fentanyl produced in Canada is being exported in micro shipments, most often through the mail. Micro traffickers are most often found on the dark web,” the spokesperson added.

David Asher, a former senior investigator with the US State Department, CIA and Drug Enforcement Administration’s Special Operations Division, shared a different perspective during an August 2024 interview with Canadian investigative journalist Sam Cooper.

Asher cited evidence suggesting fentanyl trafficking operations in Canada are highly organised.

“When we looked at the telephonic communications of Chinese organised criminals that DEA arrested in the US [for drug trafficking and money laundering] … there was an extraordinary amount of communication with Canada,” Asher said in the interview.

“It seemed like they were being controlled out of Canada, and I’m happy to say that on the record. We seized these people’s cell phones, ran them, and saw who they called in Canada.”

Asher also cited a lack of cooperation between Canadian authorities and US agencies in verifying the scale and operations of fentanyl trafficking networks.

“There’s very good reason to suspect that Canadian command and control continues, at least for money laundering and a fair extent of fentanyl precursor exports from Hong Kong and other parts of China,” he said.

“We’ve just not had adequate cooperation from the Canadian government.”

In 2022, the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada reported that organised crime groups had shifted from importing fentanyl-related products to sourcing chemical precursors from both international and domestic suppliers to manufacture the drug within Canada. The service is an inter-agency organisation that shares criminal intelligence between police forces in Canada.

In a 2024 report on organised crime in Canada, the intelligence service confirmed the extent of organised crime’s involvement in drug trafficking.

“Serious and organised crime remains a prominent threat to Canada’s security, contributing to thousands of deaths annually from overdoses due to illicit drugs, as well as firearms and gang violence,” the report said.

The intelligence service reported that international organised crime groups are leveraging Canada’s geographic location and borders to facilitate the illicit movement of goods — including drugs like fentanyl — between North America, Asia, Europe and Latin America.

The agency also reported an increase in dark web trafficking, which may explain the increased use of micro shipments and the role of online markets in the fentanyl trade.

Reports from the Canada Border Services Agency show a ninefold increase in fentanyl precursor chemical seizures in Canada between 2020 and 2021. In the first half of 2021 alone, the agency seized more than 5,000 kg of precursor chemicals used to produce fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, up from just 512 kg in 2020.

This transnational reach was further underscored in 2021 when Australian authorities intercepted their largest-ever illicit fentanyl shipment — more than 11 kg of fentanyl hidden in industrial equipment sent from Canada.

Nicholas Boyce, policy director at the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, which advocates for drug policies focused on harm reduction and decriminalisation, is sceptical that border crackdowns will be effective in stopping the flow of illegal drugs and their precursors.

He pointed to the low inspection rate of sea containers at Canadian ports, often used to ship stolen cars.

A 2022 Canada Border Services Agency internal audit revealed that the agency’s target inspection rate is between just 1.5 per cent and 2 per cent. However, the agency has not met even this target in recent years. In 2021-22, the inspection rate was 1.1 per cent; in 2020-2021, it was 0.9 per cent.

“We cannot even stop stolen cars leaving the country — how can we expect to detect small packages of powders and chemicals?” Boyce said.

Editor’s note: This piece was updated to reference the 2022 report by the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada, the reports from the Canada Border Services Agency that show a ninefold increase in precursor chemical seizures, and the information about the Australian authorities’ fentanyl seizure in 2021.

APPALLING POLICE RESPONSE TO CONCERNED STONINGTON RESIDENTS.

APPALLING POLICE RESPONSE TO CONCERNED STONINGTON RESIDENTS.

Police Deputy Commissioner Neil Paterson has conceded that the Police are frustrated by the leniency of the Victorian Bail Laws at a Stonington Police forum, as reported in the Herald Sun on the 7th of February 2025.

The Commissioner said that Victoria Police was advocating for change in the Court System.

It was reported that in a shocking admission by Deputy Paterson, “the force had never arrested more people for serious crimes than we have in at last 12 months.”

Nice of the Deputy to instil more fear into the community.

This admission, of course, did little to allay the community’s fears, but what is most alarming, according to the report, is that the only strategy presented to the community was the standard police line given to every such challenge of their performance.

“The policing panel announced increased foot and bicycle patrols to monitor areas including Chapel St in addition to existing initiatives to tackle crime.”

It takes a bit more than monitoring a crime hotspot, and the Zero Tolerance with the Broken Window Police strategy applied to these areas would be the most effective response.

Although a relatively short-term strategy, usually 6 months or so, the other areas of policing not reported as being discussed are proactive initiatives. The monitoring patrols, although proactive, are very limited without a broader application of proactive strategies that have a longer-term impact.

There is a major flaw in this announcement, as we have several CAA members facing similar concerns in their community and have been given the same hollow assurances. Patrols for a very limited period who do nothing more than monitor activity without enforcement, which is a ludicrous approach the community is heartily sick of.

Within a short time of these inevitably hollow assurances, the patrols diminish, while the problems persist, the police disappear completely, leaving the residents with no discernible difference in their ‘air of menace’, as one resident described the situation.

It is incredibly disappointing that the police command cannot come up with any new approaches and blaming the Courts and Bail Laws while admitting there are multiple parts to the Justice system and trying to shift all the blame on to the Justice system is disingenuous when police are clearly failing in their primary function. Preventing Crime.

 

PREMIER ALLAN HAS MADE A BIG CALL ON BAIL LAWS – OR HAS SHE?

PREMIER ALLAN HAS MADE A BIG CALL ON BAIL LAWS – OR HAS SHE?

Victoria can be forgiven for collectively exercising a sigh of relief at the announcement by the Allan Government about Bail Laws, Herald Sun 4th February 2025, but relief may well be premature until we see the new plans because we are not hopeful that the Government has seen the light and is proffering a solution to the worst crime rate in Victoria’s history and this may not be the silver bullet of Victoria’s hope.

The government only appears to view the problems through a narrow prism which will not lead to solutions that altering the Bail Laws is promoted to achieve.

We are not confident because the Premier has called an ‘immediate review’. Yes, that is the get-out-of-jail card so often brandished by politicians in a corner.

Pardon our scepticism, but we have seen all this before. No meaningful outcome will be achieved as the people called upon to conduct this review are the same people who advised the government on the ‘New’ crime laws passed into legislation less than six months ago that achieved little if any positive impact; at least, there is no noticeable change in the way the Courts or Police are operating that is visible.

The probability is not high that a new review by the same people and departments will expose how they got it all wrong last time.

What will happen is that the review outcome will exonerate the previous architects; the new review will see to it.

The irony is that the Premier does not even recognise the problem she is supposed to be dealing with.

There is no argument from us that the Bail Laws must be tightened, as must the judiciary’s discretion, as they will find ways to bypass possible changes to the Law.

And yes, if this is done correctly, we will see an improvement in the Law-and-Order space, but we cannot be complacent, as the crime issue will not be addressed by one magic (or not-so-magic) bullet.

All the changes in the Bail Laws may be thwarted by the judiciary, who have all seemingly overindulged in the Restorative Justice cool-aid.

The review must include how the independence of the judiciary can be retained while complying with any new strategies introduced.

Judicial accountability would be a good start.

Of equal importance is an understanding that crime prevention is the most cost-effective strategy to reduce crime. Stopping crimes happening first rather than dealing with the miscreants after they commit crimes makes absolute sense, but that does not sit well with some ideological advocates.

Seen often as the soft option, in Police parlance, Proactive policing is the only strategy shown to work.

The power of police foot patrols interacting with the community regularly is one of the most underrated weapons in the Police arsenal, but Victoria Police would instead put resources into the plethora of Task Forces and any other groups that are targeted at a particular crime after the event. We believe there are literally thousands of Police tied up in special target groups at a State and local level.

There will always be a need for some Task Force groups. Still, VicPol has become so addicted to them that they see no other alternative strategy, and there is no evidence that the Task Force approach actually works. With a rising crime rate, it is highly improbable they have any impact on the overall crime, only spasmodic impact on particular offenders who immediately get bail anyway, so the Police Task Force has been a waste of time.

Victoria has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that recently developed strategies in combination promote /facilitate crime, not reduce it.

As we have pointed out previously, children do not enter this world with an ingrained criminal disposition; all criminal values are taught, so early intervention in a child’s development is critical, and the formative Primary School Years are the logical target area if a difference is to be achieved.

If a large percentage of police resources dedicated to Task Forces were redirected to early intervention, we would see a dramatic decline in crime.

Police performing their proper function would also see the Force attracting more recruits and retaining those they have.

The Premier would do well to ask the community what strategy they would prefer.

After all, they have to live with the consequences of whatever is implemented- this review must focus on Service Delivery as their guiding principle.

GOVERNMENT PRO-TERRORISM STRATEGY, SLAMMED

GOVERNMENT PRO-TERRORISM STRATEGY, SLAMMED

CAA comment

This article, with comments submitted by James Basham, will be of great interest to the majority of our readers as it identifies quite clearly how the government is bereft of effective strategies to deal with terrorism and has headed down the path of a system that is loosely based on the failed Restorative Justice approach to problems in our society.

The Government really need to secure pragmatic thinkers who are not distracted by ideology to focus on how to best manage radicalisation in our society.

Critically, as this author points out, there is an absolute need for whatever system or strategy is adopted it must not bypass the current legal system, with all its flaws.

Establishing whether an individual has been radicalised based on a burden of proof of ‘the balance of probabilities’ at least gives a fair starting point to protect the wrongly accused and allow the community to defend itself.

**********************

 

EXTRACTS FROM THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF CRIMINOLOGY (AIC) REPORT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS (DHA) REGARDING COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM (CVE) – AND COMMENTARY

Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) was engaged to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the Living Safe Together Intervention Program (LSTIP). The evaluation focused on reviewing the different models implemented in each jurisdiction, the underlying theory of change, and early indicators of positive outcomes for at-risk or radicalised individuals. The evaluation involved two principles [sic] methods—a rapid evidence assessment of effective Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) interventions and an extensive, national consultation process with stakeholders involved in the program.

THE RAPID ASSESSMENT OF ONLY POSITIVE INTERVENTIONS, TOGETHER WITH EXTENSIVE STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS, ALLOWS AND PREDICTS A SERIOUSLY BIASED REPORT. IT’S UTILITY AND VALIDITY IS QUESTIONABLE… Author

When the LSTIP commenced, there was some uncertainty as to the scope of the problem and the degree to which a dedicated intervention program was required. There is an established, recognised and agreed need for the program.

THIS POINTS OUT THAT THE PROBLEM WAS ILL-DEFINED, IF AT ALL. THE LSTIP WAS A “GOOD IDEA” LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM TO SOLVE. LSTIP WAS APPLIED TO THE ILL-DEFINED PROBLEM. BUREAUCRACY IS THEN SEEKING TO JUSTIFY THE EXISTENCE AND REFINEMENT OF A SYSTEM THAT HAS AN ILL-DEFINED OR HIJACKED PURPOSE. THE LSTIP MAY DELIVER SOME COMMUNITY VALUE, BUT IT DOES NOT SQUARELY ADDRESS COMMUNITY NEEDS FOR SECURITY AGAINST RADICAL EXTREMISM – NOR SHOULD IT BE PURPORTED TO DO SO… Author

The program has become embedded within broader counter-terrorism response with the level of intervention activity commensurate to relative threat level and demand…..

FALLACY. THE PROGRAM IS NOT “…COMMENSURATE WITH THREAT…” DURING JANUARY 2025, RADICALISM IS OUTPACING AUTHORITY’S PROTECTIVE POWERS TO PREVENT COMMUNITY HARM. THE PROGRAM CAN BE EXPECTED TO CONTINUE TO FAIL TO DELIVER COMMUNITY SECURITY – EVEN IF LEGISLATED… Author

The programs are embedded as part of the broader counter-terrorism response in each jurisdiction, providing a viable alternative to arresting and monitoring at-risk individuals. All of the Intervention Coordinators can case manage clients who are referred to the program.

IF DEMONSTRATED VIOLENT RADICALISM IS THE MEASUREMENT CRITERIA, THE PROGRAM IS NOT WORKING SUCCESSFULLY – IT IS NOT VIABLE. OFFENDERS ARE FREE TO CONTINUE THEIR DAMAGING ACTIVITIES, EVEN THOUGH PERHAPS A LITTLE MORE SOCIALLY ORIENTED DUE TO THE PROGRAM. THE COMMUNITY EXPECTS AND ACCEPTS THAT OFFENDERS INVOLVED IN DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI’s ) OR APPREHENDED VIOLENCE ORDERS (AVO’s) ARE ARRESTED AND/OR MONITORED. THE LAW PROVIDES FOR NUMEROUS CONTROLS TO BE APPLIED. SIMILARLY, SO SHOULD THE LAW BE APPLIED TO VIOLENT RADICALS DUE TO THEIR SERIOUSLY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON COMMUNITIES – REGARDLESS OF AGE OR GENDER, WHICH APPEAR TO HAVE NO BEARING ON THE OFFENDING.

ALL INTERVENTION COORDINATORS ARE SAID TO HAVE THE CAPACITY TO MANAGE REFERRED CLIENTS – WHICH THAT MANAGING FOR COMPLIANCE TO THE INADEQUATE SYSTEM IS A FUTILE ACTIVITY…Author

The number of clients who have been engaged in the intervention program differs between the states and territories but appears to broadly reflect the threat level and demand in each jurisdiction.

OBVIOUSLY, THIS DOES NOT WORK TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE OFFENDERS OFTEN ARE ACTUALLY REPEAT OFFENDERS – THE PROGRAM IS POWERLESS TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OR LOGIC PRESENTED THAT SUGGESTS THAT THE PROGRAM HAS PREVENTED RADICAL BEHAVIOUR – IT’S CONSPICUOUS BY ITS ABSENCE IN THE REPORT… Author

There was broad agreement that the CVE Intervention Coordinators are committed and highly skilled individuals who have effectively established and monitored the various processes necessary for the operation of the program.

THAT’S ABOUT PROCESSES – MANAGING FOR COMPLIANCE TO THE INADEQUATE PROGRAM. IT’S NOT ABOUT OUTCOMES THAT ARE EFFECTIVE/PROTECTIVE…Author

The ability of Coordinators to form relationships with other agencies to develop referral pathways and deliver services to clients was noted as being particularly well-developed. They are proactive in identifying implementation barriers but have, at times, had limited capacity to overcome these issues.

COORDINATORS ARE PROACTIVE AND CAPABLE AT IMPLEMENTING A PARTICULARLY WELL-DEVELOPED SYSTEM – THAT SYSTEM LEAVES THE COMMUNITY VULNERABLE AND LEAVES OFFENDERS FREE TO REPEAT/RENEW THEIR OFFENDING. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SYSTEM/PROGRAM AND COMMUNITY SECURITY IS, AT BEST, TENUOUS..Author

…….case plans are tailored to individual needs; interventions focus on positive community integration and participation with a view to building clients’ social and emotional resilience to extremist ideologies and introducing positive influences into their social network; and access is provided to mental health services that address issues with psychopathology and antisocial traits.

WONDERFUL!!…… BUT THERE ARE NO INDEPENDENT EXTERNAL DISINCENTIVES TO DOING RADICAL COMMUNITY HARM. TOLERANCE FOR COGNITIVE DISSONANCE IS INTERNALLY CONTROLLED. SELECTIVE PERCEPTION AND CONFIRMATION BIAS HAVE PROBABLY BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN DEVELOPING RADICALISM IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO APPLY TO RESIST EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING BY CLIENTS IN THE LIVING SAFE TOGETHER INTERVENTION PROGRAM (LSTIP) SYSTEM. LSTIP CLIENTS, WITH THEIR NEWFOUND SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL RESILIENCE, MAY THEN BE EVEN BETTER EQUIPPED TO RETAIN AND CAMOUFLAGE THEIR REAL ORIGINAL VIEWS AND TO INFLUENCE OTHERS ADVERSELY… Author

However, interventions focusing on developing critical thinking and empathic skills, and those specifically focused on countering extremist ideological messaging in some way, are not being used.

THE MAJOR FOCUS OF BUREAUCRACY IS TO MAKE THE “CLIENT” FEEL LOVED [AND THEREBY ENCOURAGED TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT THEMSELVES] RATHER THAN PROVIDING THEM WITH KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS TO FILTER INPUTS OF  OTHER RADICALS AND TO UNDERSTAND THEIR IMPACT ON INDIVIDUALS AND COMMUNITY. EVEN IF THIS SERIOUS SHORTFALL WAS ADDRESSED, IT MIGHT NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE CLIENT’S TOLERANCE FOR COGNITIVE DISSONANCE [AS ABOVE]… Author

This includes improved access to mental health services, improved confidence and self-worth, forming prosocial relationships with peers, enhanced social and independent living skills, increased employability, and improved access to various government and non-government support services. There are positive signs of attitudinal change among young people with extremist views, but mixed evidence in relation to changes in behaviour and how these attitudes had manifested. ………………..there is a clear need to develop mechanisms for monitoring the progress of clients and measuring the impact of the intervention program across relevant outcome domains.

BUREAUCRACY FACILITATES/ENABLES OPPORTUNITY FOR CLIENT/OFFENDERS TO SPREAD THEIR RADICAL INFLUENCE FURTHER – AND FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT……..DESPITE HAVING “…limited data available on the impact of the intervention program”. IN THE REPORT, THIS IS HEADED AS “…promising evidence of positive outcomes….”

ACTUALLY, THE COMMUNITY IS LEFT VULNERABLE BY UNCERTAIN OUTCOMES OF A PROGRAM THAT IS NOT KNOWN TO BE EFFECTIVE.

THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE AIC REPORT WINDS UP WITH A DAMNING STATEMENT ABOUT THE SHORTFALLS OF THE PROGRAM [LSTIP]:…Author

Among the most pressing issues are the absence of appropriate, consistent and formalised case management processes, different opinions about who should be included in the program, and concerns about the suitability of the s. 47E(d) tool, barriers to information sharing, the lack of consistent agreement about the aim of the program and definition of success, unanswered questions regarding the need for an intervention component, and concerns about the longer-term sustainability of the LSTIP.

THE LSTIP PROGRAM MAY DELIVER SOME DESIRABLE SOCIAL OUTCOMES, BUT IT IS NOT THE ANSWER TO VIOLENT EXTREMISM IN OUR COMMUNITY.

IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE TO LEGISLATE INTERVENTION ATTENDANCE BY EXTREMISTS IN THE MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT IT IS A SOLUTION TO THE SECURITY PROBLEMS THEY PRESENT.

WE DO BANG ON ABOUT SCHOOLS, AND CRIME

WE DO BANG ON ABOUT SCHOOLS, AND CRIME

If we are accused of banging on about the role of Police and schools, we plead guilty as charged.

The reason is two irrefutable facts.

Firstly, all, and we mean every one of the juvenile miscreants who are terrorising our community, go through the education/schools system.

Non-attendance is the first indicator of those children who need special attention.

So it is without apology that we push for that being the place to start, ground zero of criminality, and the Police must play a critical role in this.

After much criticism of VicPol by us and others of the lack of a Police in Schools Program (PSIP), a quasi-Police Schools program was introduced. This role was added to the commitments of police, who were already overloaded. And it is the next best thing to useless in this fight. It is unfair to the members and has extremely low effectiveness in the crime fight.

The reason this pretend program won’t work is that by its nature, it is spasmodic, and children only respond to regular commitments and will only develop meaningful relationships with the Police member as a person if the relationship is stable. It is precisely the same as teaching children about mathematics learning by rote and consistency. It is also the same dynamic that builds effective families- consistency.

It should also be accepted that a contributing factor in the attrition rate of Police is the lack of proactive work being undertaken. The Police members see the impact of juvenile crime and the lack of diversion available to them to steer young people away from crime, leading to their frustration with the policing role’s effectiveness.

There can be no better example of frustration leading to the loss of a very competent Police officer than the Opposition leader, Brad Battin, who was heavily involved in Operation New Start, a police volunteer organisation partnered by teachers and Service Club Members who worked together to ensure young people got to and stayed at school.

VicPol allegedly cancelled the program on the basis that it was too labour-intensive. That the program worked very well was not a consideration. The program was scuttled. Brad had had enough and resigned from the Force.

Now mature adults who went through the original Police In Schools Program can still and often do quote the name of the Police member who helped guide them many years ago, which is an accurate measure of the effectiveness of that program.

Being at the school on the same day at the same time to deliver a structured curriculum is the key, and anything less is of seriously questionable effectiveness and rates in the category of spin, something to distract critics.

The Government, Police or even, to a lesser extent, the schools tend to overlook the inescapable reality that amid those students walking through the door for their first day of school are the future juvenile offenders who will end up wreaking havoc in our community.

The community is getting sick and tired of bureaucratic buck-passing and inaction as those responsible seemingly take no action to stem the tide.

We cannot point to one initiative the government has introduced that stems this problem.

On the contrary, the government has introduced initiatives that feed into the juvenile cohort and are irresponsible.

The raising of the age of criminal responsibility allows those children who start their life of crime at a young age to escape any sanction to modify their behaviour until they are sometimes three to four years older. By then, they are well entrenched in the criminal sphere – too late to berate or lecture because it won’t work.

Softening Bail and custodial sentences to the point of abolishing them also feeds into the rise of juvenile crime, as there are no consequences for their behaviour. Moreover, criminal enterprises, whether local or large ones, can entice young people to commit crimes on the basis that nothing will happen if they are caught.

The second irrefutable fact is the solutions are in front of them.

Having programs to ensure school attendance and building relationships between the children and the Police as the symbol of authority in the classroom and socially at Blue Light Disco’s will work.

The highly successful Police In Schools program, Operation New Start, a program that got kids to school, and Blue Light are three initiatives that need to be urgently reintroduced to arrest the rot, devastating the future of too many of our children.

It is sad that Blue Light, which started in Victoria, is thriving in every other state and territory, with many Blue Lights operating in other countries but very few operating in Victoria.

These programs fed off each other and were highly successful when they were introduced.

The Force continues to promote the notion that they are understaffed, and to a degree, this may be true. However, staffing is all about priorities and stopping crime before it happens must be rated as the primary use of resources.

Any run-of-the-mill manager can achieve more productivity with more or unlimited staff; whether they are effective is moot; it takes a leader to prioritise the way out of the imbroglio of juvenile crime.

Crowing about arrests, as is often the case, as the police executive bustle to promote their performance; sadly, catching crooks is a higher priority than stopping crime in the first place. Task Forces are prolific, but not one is dedicated to stopping crime before it happens. They are all reactive, responding to demands that have occurred.

The frontline Police know what must be done; only the Executive seem to have their heads in the sand, hoping the problem will go away instead of making the hard decisions to change the course of criminality and Force priorities.

VicPol may even slow the exodus of police from their careers if members realise that they can become involved in meaningful programs that make a difference. Simply taking the miscreants to court to be continually bailed and then at court hearing all the excuses as to why the perpetrator should not be locked up to protect the offender from themselves and the broader community is extremely frustrating for police who know that there are better ways.

Often, understated is the financial impact on all victims as they open their annual insurance bills to see substantial increases and no matter how those increases are subject to spin, the reality is that insurance companies do not lose money as they adjust their premiums to the claims. With out-of-control crime, those premiums are skyrocketing.

Crime prevention is just as, or even more critical than, arresting criminals; just ask the victims.

TERRORISM (COMMUNITY PROTECTION) AND CONTROL OF WEAPONS AMENDMENT BILL 2024

TERRORISM (COMMUNITY PROTECTION) AND CONTROL OF WEAPONS AMENDMENT BILL 2024

CAA SUBMISSION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

to the

TERRORISM (COMMUNITY PROTECTION) AND CONTROL OF WEAPONS AMENDMENT BILL 2024

The principles of this legislation are flawed.

PART 1 TERRORISM COMMUNITY PROTECTION

There is nothing in this amendment that would in any way improve or provide any Community Protection.

The concept of this Bill as a community protection initiative is absurd as it identifies at-risk individuals and invites them to volunteer for the MAP program.

And there are serious questions about the efficacy of deradicalisation programs.

As reported in the Herald Sun on 15th of Jan ’25, under the banner ‘Deradicalisation programs have mixed impact, report says’,

“Deradicalisation programs have failed to change the behaviour of high-risk individuals authorities fear could commit acts of terror in Australia or produce data on whether the initiative actually works.

Further, there have been a small number of cases where the risk associated with clients had escalated and required the involvement of law enforcement.”

The revelations come amid rising reports of antisemitism and after a spate of attacks by individuals in deradicalisation programs last year”.

This report highlights the folly of relying on bureaucratic processes to manage such an important function to protect the community instead of the legal system.

If legislation is deficient, correct it and empower the law enforcement process to manage these extremists. Courts can at least make binding orders to mitigate risk, something the bureaucracy can’t do.

We were stunned to discover two operational deradicalisation programs, LSTIP and MAPS.

Establishing a deradicalisation industry is obviously on its way, which leads to suspicion that the growth of this industry has more to do with the players involved in creating their quango rather than protecting the community, which appears to be a by-product at best.

Again, this initiative is designed to help the perpetrators, not the public. The perpetrator-first approach is the hallmark of Restorative Justice, a flawed approach to crime and/or antisocial behaviour where the perpetrator is rewarded rather than punished.

The reliance on deradicalisation is a significant flaw as there is no empirical data to suggest the likelihood of success and no reliable mechanism to guarantee that deradicalisation has been achieved; the expert consensus is that it has a hit-and-miss success rate.

To rely on such a system to protect the community is an abdication of the government’s responsibility and should something go awry. The government should be held accountable alongside the perpetrator.

How is this protection manifested? How do the Community feel protected,

The community do not know who these individuals are, where they are located and the circumstances of their radicalisation.

A family may choose to change their circumstances if they become aware of somebody close being identified as being either potentially or actually radicalised. Moreover, the employment arrangements involving the perpetrator may vary legitimately when an employer finds out an employee is on that path.

Why should the community be left in the dark? That is not community safety. It is protection for the perpetrator.

The amendments do not address these issues, leaving the government with substantial liability if things go wrong, and they fail to let people know the risks.

We live in a democracy, and nobody should be exposed to sanctions by the government bureaucracy. This is an unambiguous role of the courts. The High Court has had plenty to say about this question recently.

The volunteer nature of persons entering the MAP program leaves open the allegations of coercion to volunteer, such as” Have we got a deal for you”?

As for the perpetrator, there appears to be no effort to include protection for their rights once they are nominated as potentially or actually being radicalised. At what stage can their rights be interfered with is, or should it be a matter for a Court, not the bureaucracy?

The failure to process suspects in the normal consequence through the Courts is a failure of democracy – they are voluntarily coerced into accepting they are radicalised, and they are entirely processed administratively, losing all rights.

The high court has been clear on the application of penalties by bureaucrats and not the Courts, and no matter how much bureaucrats may pretend otherwise, MAPS and LSTIP are sanctioning.

We are not arguing against the concept of deradicalisation, but we are saying that the courts, not bureaucrats, must manage it. At least that way, the radicalisation has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities, not some obscure administrative process.

If the current offences do not adequately cover these situations, new legislation must be enacted to ensure the Courts manage these people.

A parallel to understanding the folly of this approach would be to have the community advise a bureaucracy of a regular drunk driver. That driver is offered an alcoholic program but continues to drive under the influence.

A second and more current initiative is Pill Testing, where the government will test your illicit pills and give you the green light to take them. They are still illicit, and the tests only cover the pill presented, not the ones being consumed.

Their efforts, and there are more, indicate a trend where any personal accountability and responsibility is diminished and fuelled by government intervention.

The long-term result will be the diminished need or perhaps elimination of some courts as their function is demoted so that governments can control these matters through their bureaucracies. We will all then live in a Restorative Justice nirvana.

The cost of a democracy designed to manage the individuals without checks and balances the Courts would provide is horrendous, and the energy expended would be far better used to fit the suspected radicalised individual with an ankle bracelet based on a court order.

That would protect the individual from malice by false accusations and protect the community, whereas the voluntary program will not.

Part 2 CONTROL OF WEAPONS AMENDMENT BILL 2024

The Control of Weapons Bill amendments should repeal the whole Act and ensure that police have the power to do their job. This is a switch-on-switch-switch-off approach that is clearly aimed at controlling police operations without the expectation of any positive outcome, either proactively or reactively.

It is also a dangerous and direct attack on the essential independent operational function of policing.

It is ludicrous for Police to declare an area subject to exercising powers unless an improbable agreement can be made that all perpetrators restrict themselves to the given controlled area.

Controlled weapons do not gain status by being carried in a declared area, so the concept of controlled areas is absurd. They are always a controlled weapon no matter where they are carried.

The perpetrators only need to avoid the area to avoid detection – that doesn’t stop the problem; it simply relocates it. If anybody is found by Police with a weapon in the declared area, they obviously didn’t read the paper. The foolhardiness of this approach is the people who carry controlled weapons are most unlikely to read the paper or go online to the police site to check where the police operations are.

This strategy follows the line of the approach to the drug problem – providing injecting facilities – providing drug paraphernalia to addicts, and testing pills, all deliver the same message that these things are not really illegal because the government is facilitating them.

That’s how the warnings of declared areas will be interpreted.

The weapons are the same; therefore, perpetrators must be subject to the same risks of getting caught irrespective of where they are and when.

If the legislation is deficient in this area, the amendments must enhance the ability of the Police to intervene in the carriage of any controlled weapon.

Anybody carrying a controlled weapon in any place at any time must be able to be arrested and prosecuted. Police must have the power to search and seize based on reasonable suspicion. Reasonable can be tested by the courts.

 

WE TAKE IT THAT’S AN ‘F’ FOR FAIL THEN – CRIME AT SCHOOLS

WE TAKE IT THAT’S AN ‘F’ FOR FAIL THEN – CRIME AT SCHOOLS

A headline in the Herald Sun on the 21st of January 2024 stated that reported crime at schools is at a 10-year high, with classroom crimes hitting 120 times a week.

While a percentage of offences have been after hours, with schools needing to suspend 90 students daily, a real problem of discipline is exposed.

Further, if anybody does not see the correlation between crime in our schools and the upsurge in juvenile crime, more generally, they have their head in the sand.

These problems can’t be reasonably palmed off as crimes by others outside school hours; there is an inescapable nexus between the school environment and after-hours crime, for the most part.

Nothing in the statistics would indicate that the students are not responsible for much of the after-hours of crime.

Schools should be a place of learning, and learning to be a criminal is not one of the skills we would embrace.

It was reported that schools can exercise discretion as to whether to report an incident to the police, and this is part of the problem leading to inconsistencies in crime responses.

Police are the only ones with the legislative power of discretion, and when a crime comes to the notice of a school, it must be reported to the police; if not a legal obligation, the school has a moral one to the whole school and general community, to which it is responsible. Protecting a student from an investigation is not the school’s role, as the investigation is how the truth will be determined; schools are not equipped to perform this function.

That this problem has reached this stage indicates that Victoria Police have had their priorities wrong and have had them wrong for nearly 15 years.

Interestingly, the CAA was established 10 years ago this year to address the issue of the Police’s failure to manage youth crime adequately.

Central to the management of youth crime is the reintroduction of the Police in Schools Program (PSIP)

The current schools program Victoria Police currently operates, is a shadow of the real program and probably no more effective than no program. You can’t expect positive results from a spasmodic ‘half-hearted’ approach. The ‘when we have time to do it’ approach will not work.

The CAA tried to establish a Police Veterans in Schools Program, and despite the best adverse efforts by the then Chief Commissioner Ashton to stymie the program, it was thwarted in the end by COVID-19. The first Police Veteran to enter a school under this program coincided with the introduction of COVID restrictions.

We recruited the first 12 schools we approached, and recruited a number of Police veterans to service them following the PSIP curriculum model.

Unfortunately, we are not well enough resourced to try it again. Still, there is no reason that VicPol could not recruit retired members to fulfil the Police in Schools  Officer role, reducing the impact on other operational needs.

The argument proffered is that VicPol’s resources cannot support such a program. Still, Policing is about priorities, and when the Force has a reactive corporate mindset, proactive work to prevent crime pays the priority price.

Ironically, the Chief Commissioners in recent history who have achieved outstanding results each had the balance between proactive and reactive about right, and crime was managed. We also had a much safer State and a Police Force that was highly respected and engaged.

These shocking statistics are the responsibility of the current Chief Commissioner and the Police Executive, nobody else, and it is within their remit to resolve the matters.

The place to start is the schools. Don’t blame the parents, the legislators, or the courts, although they play a part in it. The blame is sheeted directly to the Force management. Excuses are a sign of inept managers. It is no doubt they will argue they haven’t got the resources, but they haven’t got the resources not to do it either.

We understand there is currently an internal management review in place, which would provide the opportunity for a good look at the Force’s priorities and effective management of resources.

This review must go beyond just ‘shuffling the deck chairs’ to make it look like the Force is doing something, but experience tells us unless the review addresses all the causes, nothing much will change.

One area that needs serious re-evaluation and de-prioritising is the task force groups; historically, they have been the easy go-to tool of police management, but the impact on the ability of the Force to provide adequate policing overall is adversely impacted and rarely a consideration, generally leading to more crime than the Task Forces are set to address.

There will always be a need for some Task Forces, but their establishment must be carefully managed as once established, it is very hard to invoke a sunset clause to their operation as the participants quickly gain a comfort factor in the privilege of working on a Task Force, being able to ditch their uniform in favour of a US Special Forces style dress up, generally avoiding shift work and gaining their rest days predominately on weekends, a cherished part of work-life balance not shared by Police working on stations, the real front line.

These task forces aggravate the operations of VicPol because the best and brightest, hardest workers are usually selected for these roles seen as prestigious, leaving stations void of experienced police.

It is too easy a solution to any crime outbreak to establish a task force or a targeted group by any other name. These groups are often given other titles to avoid the perception of the incorrect weighting of this type of policing.

As an example of the types of inefficiencies, a drug dealer moved into our local area and openly traded his wares predominantly on a Thursday. Lines of cars would enter the street with a line of people all carrying similar $2 candy-stripped carrier bags, obviously containing ill-gotten gains to trade for drugs.

The community reported the matter with an offer of an observation post in the house directly opposite, which was readily accepted by the Police.

This criminal activity was blatant to the degree that the transactions could be seen clearly from the observation point.

The community expected the matter to be resolved within a couple of weeks, maybe, but the activity continued for over three months, with the Police observing and the crook expanding his business to a nearby rented factory, so prolific was the activity.

A properly planned and orchestrated police operation could have netted numerous thieves and drug users on many occasions, including the primary offender, and the result would have been no less effective than dragging it out for over three months; after all, the penalty is the prerogative of the courts and all this extra work, we would argue, would not add to the severity of the sentence once the primary perpetrator was eventually arrested. However, the delay would adversely contribute to the crime statistics.

One thing is for sure: the responsible citizen who tolerated the disruption to their family by Police sitting in their front room for months on end, 24/7 will not offer that privilege to the Police again. Particularly, when technology could have achieved better quality evidence.

Alienating the citizens who hitherto supported police is not good policing by any measure.

A pragmatic measurement of this operation would demonstrate that when all matters are taken into consideration, it was inefficient and poorly managed.

The question, therefore, arises of how many other similar operations are inefficient and should have their resources redirected to proactive prevention measures and the operational front line.

YOUTH CRIME – MAGISTRATE AN UNLIKELY SOLUTION TO RAMPANT JUVENILE CRIME

YOUTH CRIME – MAGISTRATE AN UNLIKELY SOLUTION TO RAMPANT JUVENILE CRIME

A new Magistrate appointment dedicated to dealing with repeat juvenile offenders has been announced, Herald Sun 20th of January 2025.

Does this mean the Government has lost confidence in the magistracy of this State to deal with repeat offenders, or is it nothing more than a ploy to give the appearance of doing something? Given that they haven’t addressed a primary cause, the failure of legislation, this is probably only a political spin.

As they say, the proof will be in the pudding, but we are not confident that anything will change.

When reviewing this Government approach to juvenile crime, to suggest it is ‘lacklustre’ is an understatement.

More than half the Children’s Courts across the State have been closed, and weak bail laws allow juveniles to ‘give the thumb’ to authority.

A whole cohort of juvenile offenders has been excluded from the Justice system by raising the age of criminal accountability; therefore, the younger cohort offends with impunity and avoids accountability, so no intervention can occur to steer them away from joining the ranks of the repeat offenders.

The youth crime surging to a 14-year high is only the beginning, not the end; we have more pain to come. And that is the pain suffered by the victims whilst the judiciary is immune.

If the government has not lost faith in the Magistrates of this State as this appointment indicates, the public certainly has. Young thugs, by their actions, treat the Courts, at best, as an inconvenience or, more likely, a joke.

Continually, we read how young thugs are bailed for various very serious crimes that are committed while they are on bail for equally serious charges.

It is not uncommon for thugs who have been bailed on multiple occasions, sometimes 30-50 times, to be granted bail again. And that is ridiculous and unconscionable. This is aggravated by the rising age of criminality, where there is no intervention to redirect the younger juveniles but instead teaches them there are no consequences for their criminal actions.

The Government is blind or ignoring the causes; where do they think the quantitative surge in juveniles is fed from? It is the 8-12 year olds providing the impetus.

Figures previously released to the Herald Sun revealed more than 100 kids aged between 10 and 17 years old were involved in at least 30 crimes each in 2024.

That number has tripled over the last five years.

There were just 34 youths offending at a minimum of 30 crimes a year in 2019.

The 103 repeat offenders recorded last year carried out at least 3090 crimes in 2024 alone, an average of eight offences per day.- Herald Sun.

The actual number of offences committed is doubtless very much higher.

 The major problem is either the structure of legislation currently in vogue or the judiciary have steered away from convention and have embarked on ideological fantasy escapade, or both, which is our pick.

It was not so long ago; Police were reporting that 30 or so prime thugs were committing the majority of the crimes. That has now not only been debunked, but the number has tripled to 103.

How the appointment of one Magistrate will rectify the anomalies of a broken judicial process is beyond comprehension.

An outstanding omission in the Government’s response was the limited reference to Victims by the Youth Justice Minister quoted as saying,

“We know there is a group of repeat offenders driving the rise in serious crimes – that’s why we’re taking action to hold them to account while offering support to help young people turn their lives around.”

Youth Justice Minister Enver Erdogan said: “This is another important step in delivering a justice system that protects the community and rehabilitates young people”.

“We want to help victims get closure by holding young people to account and helping those heading down a wrong path realise the effects of their actions.”

Minister, if you want to help victims, helping them get closure genuinely is arrant nonsense. How about first stopping the crime and the impact on victims? How about re-introducing some of the past programs, not just paying lip service to the past programs but genuinely embracing them?  Why do you want to turn lives around rather than stop them from offending in the first place, which would be the sensible approach?

The key is directing young people away from crime before, not after the fact. It is called prevention.

We are seeing disturbing reports of student misbehaviour in schools, and yet the proven Police in Schools Program, Operation New Start and Blue Light, has not been embraced to deal with this; instead, a facsimile to look like the original police school program is touted but it has not been demonstrated it works. A mere shadow of the real program.

We are unsure, but the age change to criminal liability may have completely scuttled the Police Cautioning program, the real bulwark against younger children moving through the criminal spheres to become the next generation of repeat offenders. Although it can’t be quantified accurately, the Police Cautioning Program was responsible for diverting vast numbers of young people from a life of crime.

We wish the new Magistrate well but are not hopeful that she will make a scrap of difference. At the same time, the Government fails to acknowledge and address their failures in relation to Bail, other legislative blunders and Police operational failures that feed this growing problem.

With this new Magistrate’s depth of experience, she should first be tasked with reviewing the legislation to make it effective, and then she may have something to work with. Still, as the status quo continues, she has little hope of pushing back against the Restorative Justice ideology that has infected our judiciary, one of the main causes of the judicial failures.

The Courts must follow the Law, not an ideology.

NANAIMO (CANADA) SYRINGE STABBING REIGNITES CALLS FOR INVOLUNTARY CARE

NANAIMO (CANADA) SYRINGE STABBING REIGNITES CALLS FOR INVOLUNTARY CARE

CAA comment

 Opponents to the concept of involuntary care trot out the ‘hoary old chestnut’ of a patient’s rights, but when it comes to rights, we argue every person has a right to care appropriate to their health issue. If that means involuntary care, then we support that approach.

When a person’s acuity is so manipulated by deleterious health, then in the name of humanity, we must take care of them until they are well enough to look after themselves.

Our view is tempered in that there needs to be clear medical oversight as there must be legal oversight to ensure the patient’s rights are protected and the community, one does not outrank the other.

A mechanism to have any person taken into temporary care to be assessed and the necessary information placed before a Court to determine whether the person’s involuntary care should continue and for the accountability intervals to the Court for their continued involuntary care is the mechanism that we should aspire to develop.

Police and Ambulance first responders must be given the power to place people whose acuity is compromised into temporary care to be medically assessed.

Temporary Health Orders would be the most logical authority mechanism. They were thrown around with ‘gay abandon’ during the COVID-19 pandemic, so it should be well accepted by the community.

The imminent closure of one a Victorian jail provides an opportunity for the facility to be converted to accommodate involuntary patients, and in tight fiscal times the cost to the government in paying out on contracted services to operate the prison for many years may provide some financial benefit to the State – at least we will be getting something back including saving some lives currently wasted.

Some politicians, police and community groups argue involuntary care is key to addressing severe addiction and mental health issues

The brutal stabbing last month of a 58-year-old city employee in Nanaimo, B.C., made national headlines. The man was stabbed multiple times with a syringe after he asked two men who were using drugs in a public park washroom to leave.

The worker sustained multiple injuries to his face and abdomen and was hospitalised. As of Jan. 7, the RCMP were still investigating the suspects.

The incident comes on the heels of other violent attacks in the province that have been linked to mental health and substance use disorders.

On Dec. 4, Vancouver police fatally shot a man armed with a knife inside a 7-Eleven after he attacked two staff members while attempting to steal cigarettes. Earlier that day, the man had allegedly stolen alcohol from a nearby restaurant.

Three months earlier, on Sept. 4, a 34-year-old man with a history of assault and mental health problems randomly attacked two men in downtown Vancouver, leaving one dead and another with a severed hand.

These incidents have sparked growing calls from politicians, police and residents for governments to expand involuntary care and strengthen healthcare interventions and law enforcement strategies.

“What is Premier Eby, the provincial and federal government going to do?” the volunteer community group Nanaimo Area Public Safety Association said in a Dec. 11 public statement.

“British Columbians are well past being fed-up with lip service.”

‘Extremely complex needs’

On Jan. 5, B.C.’s newly re-elected premier, David Eby, announced the province will open two involuntary care sites this spring. One will be located at the Surrey Pretrial Centre in Surrey and the other at the Alouette Correctional Facility in Maple Ridge, a city northeast of Vancouver.

Eby said his aim is to address the cases of severe addiction, brain injury and mental illness that have contributed to violent incidents and public safety concerns.

Involuntary care allows authorities to mandate treatment for individuals with severe mental health or substance use disorders without their consent.

Amy Rosa, a BC Ministry of Health public affairs officer, confirmed to Canadian Affairs that the NDP government remains committed to expanding both voluntary and involuntary care as a solution to the rise in violent attacks.

“We’re grappling with a growing group of people with extremely complex needs — people with severe mental health and addictions issues, coupled with brain injuries from repeated overdoses,” Rosa said.

As part of its commitment to expanding involuntary care, the province plans to establish more secure facilities and mental health units within correctional centres and create 400 new mental health beds.

In response to follow-up questions, Rosa told Canadian Affairs that the province plans to introduce legal changes in the next legislative session “to provide clarity and ensure that people can receive care when they are unable to seek it themselves.” She noted these changes will be made in consultation with First Nations to ensure culturally safe treatment programs.

“The care provided at these facilities will be dignified, safe and respectful,” she said.

‘Health-led approach’

Nanaimo Mayor Leonard Krog says involuntary care is necessary to prevent violent incidents such as the syringe stabbing in the city’s park.

“Without secure involuntary care, supportive housing, and a full continuum of care from detox to housing, treatment and follow-up, little will change,” he said.

Elenore Sturko, BC Conservative MLA for Surrey-Cloverdale, agrees that early intervention for mental health and substance use disorders is important. She supports laws that facilitate interventions outside of the criminal justice system.

“Psychosis and brain damage are things that need to be diagnosed by medical professionals,” said Sturko, who served as an officer in the RCMP for 13 years.

Sturko says that although these diagnoses need to be made by medical professionals, first responders are trained to recognise signs.

“Police can be trained, and first responders are trained, to recognise the signs of those conditions. But whether or not these are regular parts of the assessment that are given to people who are arrested, I actually do not know that,” she said.

Staff Sergeant Kris Clark, a RCMP media relations officer, told Canadian Affairs in an emailed statement that officers receive crisis intervention and de-escalation training but are not mental health professionals.

“All police officers in BC are mandated to undergo crisis intervention and de-escalation training and must recertify every three years,” he said. Additional online courses help officers recognise signs of “mental, emotional or psychological crisis, as well as other altered states of consciousness,” he said.

“It’s important to understand, however, that police officers are not medical/mental health professionals.”

Clark also referred Canadian Affairs to the BC Association of Chiefs of Police’s Nov. 28 statement. The statement says the association has changed its stance on decriminalization, which refers to policies that remove criminal penalties for illicit drug use.

“Based on evidence and ongoing evaluation, we no longer view decriminalization as a primary mechanism for addressing the systemic challenges associated with substance use,” says the statement. The association represents senior police leaders across the province.

‘Life or limb’

Police services are not the only agencies grappling with mental health and substance use disorders.

The City of Vancouver told Canadian Affairs it has expanded programs like the Indigenous Crisis Response Team, which offers non-police crisis services for Indigenous adults, and Car 87/88, which pairs a police officer with a psychiatric nurse to respond to mental health crises.

Vancouver Coastal Health, the city’s health authority, adjusted its hiring plan in 2023 to recruit 55 mental health workers, up from 35. And the city has funded 175 new officers in the Vancouver Police Department, a seven per cent increase in the force’s size.

The city has also indicated it supports involuntary care.

In September, Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim was one of 11 B.C. mayors who issued a statement calling on the federal government to provide legal and financial support for provinces to implement involuntary care.

On Oct. 10, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre said a Conservative government would support mandatory involuntary treatment for minors and prisoners deemed incapable of making decisions.

The following day, Federal Minister of Mental Health and Addictions Ya’ara Saks said in a news conference that provinces must first ensure they have adequate addiction and mental health services in place before discussions about involuntary care can proceed.

“Before we contemplate voluntary or involuntary treatment, I would like to see provinces and territories ensuring that they actually have treatment access scaled to need,” she said.

Some health-care providers have also expressed reservations about involuntary care.

In September, the Canadian Mental Health Association, a national organization that advocates for mental health awareness, issued a news release expressing concerns about involuntary care.

The association highlighted gaps in the current involuntary care system, including challenges in accessing voluntary care, reports of inadequate treatment for those undergoing involuntary care and an increased risk of death from drug poisoning upon release.

“Involuntary care must be a last resort, not a sweeping solution,” its release says.

“We must focus on prevention and early intervention, addressing the root causes of mental health and addiction crises before they escalate into violent incidents.”

Sturko agrees with focusing on early intervention but emphasises the need for such interventions to be timely.

“We should not have to wait for someone to commit a criminal act in order for them to have court-imposed interventions … We need to be able to act before somebody loses their life or limb.”

NEW LAWSUIT CHALLENGES ONTARIO’S DECISION TO PROHIBIT SAFE CONSUMPTION SERVICES

NEW LAWSUIT CHALLENGES ONTARIO’S DECISION TO PROHIBIT SAFE CONSUMPTION SERVICES

CAA Comment

This is another insightful article in this important series, dealing with the inevitable pushback from the pro-drug injecting room lobby.

What is not addressed is the weight that should be given to this group and do they have a vested interest.

The argument is over establishing Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hubs in lieu of safe injecting rooms.

A very similar concept to the position of the CAA.

As a society, we would not tolerate accepting that a person with any sort of health issue was not treated, but rather, their affliction or disease was just managed, and the causes were actively facilitated when cures were available.

 We will be closely watching the legal ramifications of the options to close and modify Injecting Rooms and convert them to Hart Hubs. Altogether a sound strategy from which addicts may recover from their illness rather than the addiction being fed.

The operator of a Toronto overdose prevention site is challenging Ontario’s decision to prohibit 10 supervised consumption sites from offering their services.

In December, Neighbourhood Group Community Services and two individuals launched a constitutional challenge to Ontario legislation that imposes 200-metre buffer zones between supervised consumption sites and schools and daycares. The Neighbourhood Group will be forced to close its site in Toronto’s Kensington Market as a result.

In its court challenge, the organization is arguing site closures discriminate against individuals with “substance use disabilities” and increase drug users’ risk of death and disease.

The challenge is the latest sign of growing opposition to Ontario’s decision to either shutter supervised consumption sites or transition them into Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) Hubs. The hubs will offer drug users a range of primary care and housing solutions, but not supervised consumption, needle exchanges or the “safe supply” of prescription drugs.

Critics say the decision to suspend supervised consumption services will harm drug users and the health-care system.

“We’re very happy that the HART Hubs are being funded,” said Bill Sinclair, CEO of Neighbourhood Group Community Services. “They’re a great asset to the community.”

“[But] we want HART Hubs and we want supervised consumption sites.”

‘Come under fire’

On Thursday, the Ontario government announced that nine of the 10 supervised consumption sites located near centres with children would transition into HART Hubs. The Neighbourhood Group’s site is the only one not offered the opportunity to transition, because it is not provincially funded.

Laila Bellony, a harm reduction manager at a supervised consumption site at the Parkdale Queen West Community Health Centre in Toronto, says she is worried that drug users may avoid using HART Hubs altogether if they do not facilitate the use of drugs under the supervision of trained staff.

Data show this oversight can prevent deaths by facilitating immediate intervention in the event of an overdose.

Bellony is also concerned the site closures will increase the strain on other health-care services. She predicts longer wait times and bed shortages in hospital emergency rooms, as well as increased paramedic response times.

“I think the next thing that will happen is the medical or health-care system is going to come under fire for being sub-par. But it’s really all starting here from this decision,” she said.

She questions how the HART Hubs will meet demand for detox and recovery services or housing solutions.

Parkdale Queen West Community Health Centre and its sister site, the Queen West Site, serve hundreds of clients, Bellony says. By contrast, Ontario’s HART Hub rollout plan indicates all 19 hubs will together provide 375 new housing units across the province.

“The HART Hub model is not a horrible model,” said Bellony. “It’s the way that it’s being implemented that’s ill-informed.”

In a response to requests for comment, a media spokesperson for the Ontario Ministry of Health directed Canadian Affairs to its August news release. That release lists proposals for increased safety measures at remaining sites, and a link to a HART Hub “client journey.”

On Dec. 3, the Auditor General of Ontario, Shelley Spence, released a report criticizing the health ministry’s “outdated” opioid strategy, noting it has not been updated since 2016.

National data show a 6.7 per cent drop in opioid deaths in early 2024. But experts caution it is too soon to call it a lasting trend. Opioid toxicity deaths in 2023 were up 205 per cent from 2016.

“We concluded that the Ministry does not have effective processes in place to meet the challenging and changing nature of the opioid crisis in Ontario,” the auditor general’s report says.

“The Ministry did not … provide a thorough, evidence-based business case analysis for the 2024 new model … [HART Hubs] to ensure that they are responsive to the needs of Ontarians.”

‘Ill-informed’

Ontario has cited crime and public safety concerns as reasons for blocking supervised consumption sites near centres with children from offering their services.

“In Toronto, reports of assault in 2023 are 113 per cent higher and robbery is 97 per cent higher in neighbourhoods near these sites compared to the rest of the city,” Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones’ office said in an Aug. 20 press release.

The province has also cited concerns about prescription drugs dispensed through safer supply programs being diverted to the black market.

Police chiefs and sergeants in the Ontario cities of London and Ottawa have confirmed safer supply diversion is occurring in their municipalities.

“We are seeing significant increases in the availability of the diverted Dilaudid eight-milligram tablets, which are often prescribed as part of the safe supply initiatives,” London Police Chief Thai Truong said at a Nov. 26 parliamentary committee meeting examining the effect of the opioid epidemic and strategies to address it.

But Bellony disputes the claim that neighbourhoods with supervised consumption sites experience higher crime rates.

“Some of the things that [the ministry is] saying in terms of crime being up in neighbourhoods with safe consumption sites — that’s not necessarily true,” she said.

In response to requests for information about the city’s crime rates, Nadine Ramadan, a senior communications advisor for the Toronto Police Service, directed Canadian Affairs to the service’s crime rate portal.

The portal shows assaults, break-and-enters and robberies in the West Queen West neighbourhood have remained relatively stable since the Queen West supervised consumption site opened in 2018.

In contrast, crime rates are higher in some nearby neighbourhoods without supervised consumption sites, such as The Junction.

“While I can’t speak to perceptions about a rise in crime specifically around supervised consumption sites, I can tell you that violent crime is increasing across the GTA,” Ramadan told Canadian Affairs. She referred questions about Jones’ statements about crime data to the health minister’s office.

Jones’ office did not respond to multiple follow-up inquiries.

Mixed feelings

In July, Canadian Affairs reported that business owners in the West Queen West neighbourhood were grappling with a surge in drug-related crime.

Rob Sysak, executive director of the West Queen West Business Improvement Association, says there are mixed feelings about their neighbourhood’s site ceasing to offer safe consumption services.

“I’m not saying [the closure] is a positive or negative decision because we won’t know until after a while,” said Sysak, whose association works to promote business in the area.

Sysak says he has heard concerns from business owners that needles previously used by individuals at the site may now end up on the street.

Bellony supports the concept of HART Hubs, offering addiction and support services. But she says she finds the province’s plan for the hubs to be unclear and unrealistic.

“It seems very much like they kind of skipped forward to the ideal situation at the end,” she said. “But all the steps that it takes to get there … are unaddressed.”

 

AN ABSOLUTELY AVOIDABLE DEATH – WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?

AN ABSOLUTELY AVOIDABLE DEATH – WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?

A 67-year-old male driver lost his life when his small car was destroyed by a speeding truck.

The truck was allegedly stolen, and Police had failed to stop it using ‘stop sticks’.

Apart from the ‘stop sticks’ being old problematic technology, we need to look further as to why this life was wasted and what systematic failures contributed to the death.

The ability of police to intercept dangerous vehicles safely must be addressed, and new technologies capable of stopping a vehicle must be legitimately explored.

The CAA has long advocated for the introduction of the G-Tag (see  https://caainc.org.au/the-g-tag-a-new-…community-safety/) to give Police the ability to disable a vehicle that poses an unacceptable threat to the occupants or the public more generally. Additionally, it will also reduce the danger to the police themselves, and that has to be a significant positive.

This technology will also play a critical role in any upsurge in terrorism.

Of equal importance, the circumstances of this crash and waste of life can be put squarely on the shoulders of the judiciary. Not the government but the judiciary.

It was reported that,

“A 40-year-old Deer Park man, who police allege was driving the truck, was taken to hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

It was later revealed he was on bail for previous car theft and drug possession crimes and was due to face court in February after police charged him with another car theft, unlicensed driving and possessing drugs in November.”

If this life lost is not to be in vain, the establishment of nothing less than a Royal Commission to examine the role of the judiciary in these matters is well justified.

The accountability of the Judiciary is the point to be questioned, noting that in the lower courts, and in particular bail hearings, the presiding judicial officer is never named by the media. In contrast, the higher court Judges are regularly named as a matter of course. A legitimate form of accountability is lacking in the lower jurisdictions.

This lack of accountability, where the presiding officers can remain anonymous, must change so the public can know which judiciary members are responsible for bad outcomes.

The judiciary generally seems to hide behind the government, claiming they are only working within the laws the government provides. This is nonsense.

They must interpret the laws relevant to the circumstances of the matters before them.

An inquiry would expose the folly of the infection of the judiciary by the failed theoretical strategy called ‘Restorative Justice’ and given the regular failure of courts to hold perpetrators to account and protect the public, that infection has reached epidemic proportions, and people are dying as a result.

The pendulum has swung too far in favour of the criminals, and the rest of the community is indeed paying a very high price – with their lives.

The CAA invites the Government and the Opposition to urgently meet with the CAA to explore the G-Tag issue.

It is now a matter of life and death.

CANADA’S DRUG CRISIS IS VICTORIA’S ‘CANARY IN A CAGE’

CANADA’S DRUG CRISIS IS VICTORIA’S ‘CANARY IN A CAGE’

The Herald Sun of January 7, p16, quotes Canadian Government figures of 49,000 deaths from opioid abuse between January 2016 and June 2024.  This is a spine-chilling message for Victoria’s Labor Government, which has enthusiastically embraced pill testing at music festivals and has demonstrated a consistent determination to continue with a “harm minimisation” strategy that is a total failure in curbing the use of illicit drugs.

The CAA has long called for a completely new health-based approach that concentrates on getting people off their drug addiction rather than facilitating drug use. https://caainc.org.au/sometimes-there-is-just-a-better-way/.

The North Richmond so-called “Safe Injecting Facility” that has so devastated the lives of local residents is a further example of Labor’s disregard for the many adverse consequences of catering to drug users at the expense of the community.

Canada’s experience ought to be warning enough that Victoria is headed in the entirely wrong direction with its current illicit drug policy.

It is time for the vast silent majority to realise that they have the power to force change.  If Labor won’t listen, the only remedy is at the ballot box to support any political party that will.

RESIDENTS FORKING OUT BECAUSE OF POLICE SERVICE DELIVERY FAILURE

The media headlines scream the plight of Melbourne’s affluent leafy suburbs and the burgeoning crime rates affecting the wealthy areas of Melbourne.

The Police are just as quick to quote statistics allegedly disproving any neighbourhood concerns, accusing them of over-egging the problem. The difficulty with that approach is that Police are trying to second guess how the community feels. If they don’t feel safe, all the statistics in the world will not enhance their eudemony.

As reported, the residents of Middle Park are hiring private security guards to patrol their neighbourhoods to help keep their streets safe. Other private security companies have already been patrolling areas in Werribee, Wyndham Vale, Camberwell, Hawthorn, Toorak, Brighton, Caulfield and Balwyn for months.

What concerns the CAA is that with nine or ten communities already hiring security, what of the suburbs that cannot afford this approach? Are they metaphorically kicked just down the gutter?

With the growth of private security services, communities deem it necessary for their safety because of Police ineffectiveness; the risk of litigation against Victoria Police must be considered a reality, particularly if all of the aggrieved communities join together with those who cannot afford security and pursue a class action against VicPol for lack of service. Apart from a class action, the group may form a serious voting block, developing clout with a political bent.

Victoria police, for its part, quotes crime statistics to counter the arguments of lack of Police service, and therein lies the problem. There are numerous excuses, but admitting failure is not one of them; it would, however, be a good place to start.

Victoria Police just doesn’t get it.

Policing in Victoria has lost touch with its primary function, preventing crime. That there are many arrests and successful police operations does not address the crime issue in its broadest context; arrests are only the measure of the failure of policing to prevent crime.

The CAA has spoken with many police executives and is disappointed that they do not even know or understand the basics of policing.

Over time, the Force has manipulated the narrative of proactive policing to encompass any action that the police perform; in other words, investigations are considered proactive, and this phenomenon is not restricted to a couple of outlier senior commanders but to command as a whole led by the Chief Commissioner.

The proactive, reactive conundrum example is that a Police patrol tasked with a particular function to apprehend felons in a given area at a given time is classified incorrectly as proactive; it is active policing. Alternatively, Police tasked with reducing criminal activity in a given location is proactive policing; any crime detected as opposed to prevented is coincidental.

The difference is not too subtle. If a police operation is focused on trying to catch crooks, hiding behind bushes to catch them out has success. Their success is measured by the number of arrests, but do those arrests translate into crime reduction?

The most relevant assessment of Police effectiveness is not the number of arrests but advice from those whom policing is asked to deliver its services, and that is not the crooks and not the politicians. It is the victims.

To better understand the proactive reactive conundrum, the actions of a previous Chief Commissioner, when confronted with a strong recommendation to close a Country Police Station, come to mind.

The recommendation was based on the lack of arrests and the lack of crime reports over an extended period, inferring that the police member was lazy, incompetent or both. This particular station had the worst statistical data used as a benchmark for Police performance for the State.

The Chief Commissioner denied permission to close the station but directed the report authors to clone the police member as he was achieving the perfect record of any police station in the state.

There was no arrest because crime and crime reports were absent—the ultimate proactive policing model. That police member was involved in over twenty community organisations. The impact was that no one in his area wanted to let him down by committing offences.

Another classic example is the Police Highway Patrol (HP) working the Hume Highway out of Seymour one easter.

Renowned for the high accident rate, it was not abnormal to have a couple of fatalities over this period.

The Seymour HP patch was Kalkallo to Euroa. The Seymour car initially drove to Euroa, turned around, put on the car warning lights and drove south to Kalkallo ostensibly as a visual emergency vehicle.

The HP then returned to Euroa with the flow of traffic and then repeated this process for the duration of the shifts over Easter. The rationale was that the vast majority of vehicles using this part of the highway would have been exposed to the police car.

All hell broke loose when the Seymour HP supervisor at Benalla compiled the statistical returns after Easter.

The number of bookings by each office showed a stark disparity between the two offices.

At that stage, Benalla had the infamous HP member known to the truckies as 1080, as deadly as rabbit poison, and his sidekick 540, only half as bad.

The bullocking came, and it was severe including threats that the Seymour HP would be kicked off the Highway back to a station, and on it went. Eventually, the Sergeant took a breath when he was reminded that there had been no fatalities between Kalkallo and Euroa for the whole of Easter, but on his Highway, Euroa to the NSW border, they had three.

That is a classic proactive versus reactive approach to policing. The Benalla crew had heaps of bookings achieved by all sorts of creative techniques, but does that justify the three lives that could possibly have been saved had a proactive approach been adopted?

The supervisor never raised the issue again, and the Seymour HP member was not rated down on annual assessment.

Victoria Police has lost the ability to understand the essential policing role and refuses to address the anomaly in the Force strategy; we suspect predominantly through ignorance; however, when Senior Command doesn’t even know the difference between proactive and reactive, what hope do the subordinate officers and troops have of implementing proactive strategies?

The test should be not what the command thinks but what the public thinks and what type of policing they want because, currently, they are paying out the billion-dollar bills for a Force failing to deliver the outcomes they are employed to provide. The Force could well do with a decent injection of accountability to the community it is supposed to serve.

The advent of communities employing their own security to achieve a level of safety that police are not providing strengthens the argument that police in this state are failing.

If you have any doubts as to this failure, ask yourself why, if we are told there are all these crooks being caught, why do we feel less safe, and why are there more vicious and disturbing crimes being committed?

The CAA membership is growing through disenchanted members of the public angered by the lack of Policing effectiveness – we are heading for a crisis of lawlessness, and the community is acutely aware of it. Victoria Police seem to be in denial of the inevitability.

We already have a number of community members joining the CAA who are disenchanted with the status quo, whether it is the residents of North Richmond near the drug injecting room, A crime spree at a local Bingo Hall in the west, retailers in St Kilda dealing with drug addicts, community group in Dandenong being bullied by Local government, NSW Tobacconist being threatened by unlawful tobacco cartels, one punch victims in Eltham, a single small business owner in Croydon, issues with forest areas of the Yarra Valley, problems for night clubs in Prahran, or problems with Police corruption.

The CAA gives all these people who are disenchanted by policing a voice.

We have given Victoria Police ample opportunity to address their and others’ concerns. Still, there is a definite lack of enthusiasm on behalf of the Force to do its job.

There are many success stories; however, a typical response is to blame the victim, which is the lowest form of responsibility rejection, and that is, more often than not, from very Senior people who should know better but do not.

Perhaps we can assist the public in coordinating security services or provide advice and guidance in their situations.

With over 400 years of executive police experience in our group, we will surely be able to help.

If anyone is interested in assisting the CAA in helping yours and other communities, contact us at info@caainc.org.au.

POLICE MENTAL HEALTH CAUSES 200,000 SHIFTS LOST.

POLICE MENTAL HEALTH CAUSES 200,000 SHIFTS LOST.

The loss of Police shifts may be a major issue for Victoria Police, but it is devastating for the public.

The Austrian Newspaper reports on the 31st of December 2024 on the Victoria Police Annual Report, which indicates that the loss of operational Police shifts has grown to 200,000 from 2024, a 12% spike.

As scary as this headline number is, the reality is that global statistics of this nature enable the actual causes to be hidden.

The impact of attending Traumatic events is well-overplayed; police for generations have all been faced with traumatic experiences, none more horrendous today than Police have faced in the past.

We defy anybody to find a serving or former police member who does not experience flashbacks to a trauma they have been exposed to. These events are with the Police for a lifetime, so managing them is the key.

Police are ordinary people doing an extraordinary job, and the risk that their experiences can overwhelm them is acute; however, how these ordinary people deal with exceptional circumstances sets them apart.

Searching for a solution has spawned an exponential growth of support services across the organisation, but the problem continues to escalate.

As a strategy that is a failure.

Ploughing in more resources will inevitably lead to growth in shifts lost, not a reduction—the self-fulfilling philosophy syndrome.

The spawning of an industry designed to assist Police victims of alleged work-related trauma has grown so large that it now self-generates its own demand and need, bordering on touting for business as the inevitable competition for services increases.

This clearly shows a need to look more closely at causes that may be considered a no-go zone for Police Command.

There are obvious causes, and solutions are embedded in each.

The role of the Police Association in promoting Trauma and PTSI as a major part of the convoluted industrial action is not helping the Police members they allegedly represent.

It does, however, elevate the severity of the problem to near a contagion level- reminding older Police of the contagion at one stage of Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI); everybody seemed to catch it.

The Police Association needs to urgently settle several ambit claims so that the workforce can return to some normality and the more contentious claims can be resolved later after the Force recovers to some degree.

One of the most effective methods to ensure the phenomenon continues at pace is the reinforcement among members of the dire state of their trauma exposure.

Continual exposure to the impact on mental health of trauma, in many cases, will promote the severity of a symptom looking for a name. Every foible experienced by Police is neatly packaged as PTSI, Trauma-related. Managers can then bundle up the issues affecting the Police member, tie it off in an apocryphal sack and stick it in a corner. No longer their problem.

The role of Police managers in this process cannot be highlighted enough. It is how the management handles staff that has a direct correlation to outcomes. Critically, this must be accurately measured.

There is broad anecdotal evidence that the trauma a member experiences is not of itself the cause for members not coping but rather the performance or lack thereof by managers throughout their chain of command that is the real cause.

This could quickly be resolved by setting benchmarks or key performance indicators on all ranks above Senior Sergeant, where the incidents of Trauma-related impacts on their staff are measured.

The span of control of everybody above that rank will quickly identify which managers are failing in this area to allow for targeted remedial action by the manager or their environment.

A lack of accountability has infected the Force, and this might be the first step in returning to an environment where staff may develop confidence in their managers by them being held to account.

The Force is not the only organisation with issues with management structure stifling the operations of the organisation.

It has been reported that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) has problems similar to those of VicPol, particularly in staff retention.

The allegations indicated that the ADF management structure is bloated and that decision-making is drawn up from the frontline operatives. Ironically, it is the level of decision-making in the ADF that much of its proud history was built on. Empowering soldiers to make their own decisions.

The similarities with VicPol are significant as recent governments have eroded the independence of the role of Constable of Police, removing discretion and applying legislation that tries, unsuccessfully, to regulate the human function of Police in an environment that is actually unable to be regulated.

As with the ADF, destroying the soldier’s and police’s ability to make decisions and achieve job satisfaction directly adversely affects the organisation’s performance.

This relates directly to the recruitment advertising strategies of both organisations. The high-grade, high-gloss recruiting advertising sets a scene to encourage recruits; however, if the reality conflicts with the advertised image, therein lies the retention issue where recruits quickly become dissatisfied that the advertised careers are not what happens in reality.

Management accountability at all levels is the key to a solution. The issue is not how many senior managers are in the organisation but what is it they do. Solve that, and the overall organisation will again prosper.

To manage PTSI, coping methods of informal and formal design must be promoted, and seeking professional help must be downgraded to service only in extreme cases. It’s not the first stop.

A simple management technique is the metaphorical Filing cabinet approach.

A well-constructed four-draw filing cabinet has one unique feature- only one drawer can be opened at a time.

The metaphoric cabinet can store life/police experiences in an order that suits the individual.

The bottom draw is where the worst traumas are stored and are generally of a historical nature; the next draw-up has mid-term trauma, with the current issue needing attention in draw number one, moving them to draw number two due to the passage of time or significance.

That means only one trauma can be dealt with at a time, as you cannot open two draws at once, and you cannot inadvertently open the number four Trauma draw.

The key is that the member is left in control, although triggers may still exist.

Police are ordinary people who do extraordinary things; therefore, the risk of psychological damage is higher. However, focusing on management skills and promoting coping mechanisms rather than rushing to fashionable diagnoses would reduce the number of lost shifts and improve the welfare of all members.

Identifying the managers who lack personnel management skills in this area will become very obvious once the concept that they are accountable sinks in.

Measured by their pushback and inane rationalisations, they should immediately be encouraged to review their career aspirations. They are not fit to command.

IT HAS COME TO THIS!

IT HAS COME TO THIS!

Victoria Police are off to Court to battle the current industrial dispute with the Police Association.

This dispute involving pay and conditions has dragged on for far too long, which points to intransigence on the side of both parties.

The unfortunate part of this dispute is that the real victims will be the public.

There is no doubt that given the public discourse on crime at the moment, either the administration of Victoria police has got their priorities very wrong, or the police members themselves are not performing at their optimum effectiveness.

It has been reported that the force is substantially understrength, creating disquiet among the rank and file, which is totally understandable. This problem didn’t happen overnight; it has been festering for a long time and has now manifested into a major issue.

Poor recruiting practices and creating a top-heavy organisation are all the failings of the force administration.

If the Force has been trying to address the issue, there is no evidence that they are succeeding in recruiting or retention, the other key driver affecting police numbers.

Ironically, it was not that long ago that the Force dispensed with two senior ranks, Chief Inspector and Chief Superintendent, based on efficiency.

What this did was cause a fractured hierarchal structure where senior people were promoted, not having served at the various levels of command, to hone and develop their leadership skills, as was the historical case, leading to ordinary commanders at the highest levels.

The plethora of commanders at the top end of the organisation has caused the organisation to slow to a snail’s pace as each commander seeks to eke out responsibility and or relevance, stagnating creative management and the development and function of the organisation.

Moreover, the growth in the number of senior people has literally exploded contrary to the intended outcome of removing ranks.

The impact apart from the poor organisational performance is most felt at the coal face of Policing, and that translates into the reduced capacity of the organisation to perform its function, and the people suffer poor service delivery.

For every additional senior officer position, apart from that individual position being removed from the operations, their support staff will also be drawn from the frontline.

These numbers may seem small, but collectively, it is probable that ancillary staff could staff another police station.

There are any number of drivers to address retention, and among the most obvious is a lack of job satisfaction.

This industrial imbroglio will substantially negatively impact retention the longer it drags on.

Staff retention is not only impacted by bad management but also by government intervention in the police role based on ideological values rather than pragmatic outcomes.

The State would not be in the position it currently finds itself in had these issues been recognised and addressed.

On the other side of the ledger, the rank and file, represented by the Police Association, according to media reports, has shown no intention to compromise in this dispute and lacking from that side and never uttered in public discourse is that dirty word, productivity.

The public support for police, which has stood up surprisingly well, will tend to wain when they are put at risk because this dispute drags on. This is not helped by being reminded continually by police vehicles daubed in graffiti.

Public support is easily lost and very difficult to recover, making it imperative that the Chief Commissioner and the Secretary of the Police Association find a way to resolve the dispute soon.

All the Association demands are well and good; however, the Association has boxed itself into a corner where to compromise it will lose face, as the dispute drags on their position is weakened. And that, for some, will be translated into weakness rather than pragmatism to end this dispute.

The longer the resolution takes, the greater the risk there is to recovery in the relationship between the command and the frontline troops, which may become fractured beyond repair.

It is now time for the Chief Commissioner and the Secretary of the Association to meet one-on-one and thrash out a deal that can be taken to the Government.

The legal approach where the protagonist fires salvos from safely behind the lines of silk robes will more than likely exacerbate the dispute, irrespective of what the courts find.

How this dispute got to this stage is unclear. Still, we have confidence that without interference, the Chief Commissioner and the Association Secretary are well capable of thrashing out a resolution – time for leadership so direct contact with each other’s nemesis can resolve the impasse.

Get on with it.

The longer it drags on, the more damage wrought.

YOUTH STRATEGIES FAIL YOUTH AND THE COMMUNITY

YOUTH STRATEGIES FAIL YOUTH AND THE COMMUNITY

There is no adequate expression to describe the youth problem in this State.

Is the problem with the Police, the Courts, the juvenile legal services, the schools, parents or the mishmash of the government departments?

Quite clearly, the problems are with all of them. They all have one common denominator: they are not accountable in any tangible way for their failures.

It would be an interesting challenge to examine the performance of each resource and determine its effectiveness. Unfortunately, the spin doctors would have a field day explaining why their organisation is faultless; it will invoke the ‘it is him over there’ syndrome.

It truly is a mishmash when you ask Google AI to determine which Government department is responsible for youth-

The Department of Families, Fairness and Housing (DFFH) in Victoria is responsible for youth, and the Minister for Youth is Natalie Suleyman MP. The DFFH also supports the Minister for Children and the Minister for Disability. 

The Commission for Children and Young People (CCYP) is an independent body that promotes the safety and well-being of children and young people in Victoria. The CCYP’s vision is to respect and defend the rights of children and young people. 

The Department of Justice and Community Safety Victoria supervises children and young people in the criminal justice system.

Notably absent from CCYP’s charter is the promotion of the obligations and responsibilities of children that must go with protection of their rights.

It is not some aberration that the offences being committed by youths have been climbing in intensity for some time, highlighted by the level of violence currently being reported daily.

It is fast becoming a war zone out there.

What has become even more obvious is that the current systems, programs and strategies for keeping youth to be safe and away from violence and crime are not working.

Youths armed with machete-type weapons taking on Police at a Christmas Carol’s service has got to be the absolute last straw.

It would also not be a surprise if we found out the perpetrators responsible for the firebombing of the Jewish synagogue last week could well be the work of juveniles.

Juveniles again running amok in the CBD highlights the ever-present danger to all citizens by this crazy state of affairs.

There have been, and there will be, inevitable deaths as a result of this behaviour. Recently, it has become perilously close to being reality when a juvenile involved in a home invasion tried to attack a young mother who had a two-month-old baby in her arms. The baby suffered severe head injuries.

That the incident happened in another State is irrelevant but demonstrates the major danger of violent juveniles. They do not consider any consequences that deter them from this violence.

Many years ago, a highly respected trainer of police recruits, Les Harly, an ex-Olympic boxer, repeatedly warned recruits that the most dangerous perpetrator they would confront with a gun was a juvenile because they would not consider the consequences of pulling the trigger.

This is sage advice today as police will inevitably confront armed teenagers not with machetes as is the current favoured weapon, but guns.

The consequence of unchecked escalation of violence.

Still, the underscored effect on families whose safe haven, their home, is regularly violated is the most impacted and has the longest severe effect on the families.

Where do we start?

Our civic leaders of all political persuasions must first acknowledge there is a problem.

Then, a team must be assembled to advise on how the issues can be addressed.

As complicated as the problem first appears, the solution or solutions are easy to identify as the activities of the juveniles themselves provide the answers.

If a child is told not to put their hand in a flame but ignore the advice, then the pain of the burn will dissuade them from ever trying it again; there is a consequence for the action.

If they play on the roadway and ignore parental advice, with the parent resorting to dragging them off the road, the lesson is learnt: there is a consequence for their action.

Considering solutions from the top down would always fail, but we never expected the spectacular failure we are currently witnessing. The terrifying part of this trend, and like all trends, it will continue to escalate, is the current trajectory bodes very poorly for all of us, including the youth.

The arrest of a juvenile perpetrator is the closest we come to a consequence of their actions; however, the impact of the arrest is diluted by the legal process that follows.

While the judiciary believes their actions are compassionate and balanced, what they think is irrelevant as much as they won’t admit it. The key is what the perpetrators believe, being lectured doesn’t cut it.

The imperative is that the perpetrators understand that there are consequences for their illegal activities that are not palatable to them, irrespective of what the judiciary might consider appropriate.

What the judiciary might consider a consequence is useless if the perpetrator does not see it that way.

All the words directed at juveniles by the judiciary are just white noise to them, and anyway, their lawyer speaks for them, so in their eyes, it doesn’t impact them.

The youths consider walking out of Court, whether on bail or with a non-custodial sentence, as ‘I beat it again’. No matter the threats and lectures they are given during the process.

There is also the phenomenon promoted by older criminals that allows the youths to be recruited for crime; the nothing will happen if you are caught’ principle.

Many young people are aspirational to climb further up the criminal pecking order and share in the rewards, albeit ill-gotten, and this is a serious motivator.

The other motivator for youth is the influence (bragging rights) within their sphere, and that can become all-encompassing for younger people driving their lives. That there are no consequences for their behaviour has built their ethos.

In either of these two examples, the common denominator and drivers are the lack of consequences other than the risk of being arrested, and even that is diluted because the Courts do not fulfil their function as the community intends.

Some time ago, a high-profile person working in the youth space for a respected youth organisation reacted to our suggestion that as part of an accountability strategy, parents could, in consultation with the Police, have young people lose access to their mobile phones as part of the Police cautioning program for a period.

The response we received is a demonstration of how some with a socialist ideological bent view punishment or consequences as irrelevant and only promote more antisocial behaviour.

The person became very indignant at the suggestion and claimed that it was absolutely the wrong approach because all the young person would do was act out until they got it back.

Doh! That response proves the suspicion that many working in the youth space do not understand their role. Giving into the youth is the antithesis of effective youth management. Rewarding bad behaviour will never work.

The issues are monumental, but unless a new approach or an old one in part is re-introduced, then the consequences really do not bear thinking about.

‘SCABS’: COPS TURN ON EACH OTHER

‘SCABS’: COPS TURN ON EACH OTHER

This headline most former and serving Police find very hard to accept, arguably a contradiction of our Police motto, ‘Tenez le droit’ or ‘Uphold the Right’.

How can the Force operate when some are unprepared to ‘Uphold the right’ by labelling their colleagues ‘Scabs’?

The Police Oath is also worth a read,

I [ insert name ] [ swear by Almighty God/do solemnly and sincerely affirm ] that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign as a police officer in Victoria in any capacity in which I may be appointed, promoted, or reduced to, without favour or affection, malice or ill-will for the period of [ insert period ] from this date, and until I am legally discharged, that I will see and cause the peace to be kept and preserved, and that I will prevent to the best of my power all offences, and that while I continue to be a police officer I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties legally imposed on me faithfully and according to law.’ [Victoria Police Act 2013, Schedule 2]

Interestingly, the Oath says nothing about exemptions for industrial action, and if industrial actions breach their Oath of Office, what consequences will be applied to members who engage in breaches? Have they renounced their allegiance to the Oath?  With renouncing their Oath, how can they remain a ‘police officer in Victoria’?

Police turning on their own is also anathema in policing and unheard of, with the only likely loser the Police Association, or Police Union as it has now morphed into.

Allegations that the Police Association has moved too close to the government are born out in this dispute where the Association is generating angst against the Chief Commissioner, not the Government, who is responsible.

When the push for changed rostering arrangements to a four-day week with extended shift hours was rejected by the majority of Association members, the Association took the ‘Voice’ approach. Irrespective of how you vote, ‘we know best’, and that’s what we will pursue.

That approach is straight out of an ideology playbook.

The Police Association did not read the room well, and they are rushing to an outcome that may not be in the best interest of the community or the Force and, in particular, its members.

Unless the Police Association tempers its behaviour, the likelihood of a breakaway Association that will accept the will of its members cannot be discounted.

The word ‘ugly’ has been used to describe the current imbroglio in this industrial dispute, which can only be sheeted to one side.

Whoever is behind the attempt to destabilise the Police Force, they are succeeding, and the drivers may not all be within the Police ranks but outside with agendas that benefit them.

Identifying the external entities that would benefit from a damaged Force doesn’t take much imagination. It was very clever of the Government to allow the blame to be shifted from them to the Chief, but they are the ones responsible – they hold the purse strings.

The other part of this dispute that has become unacceptable is the attack on the Chief Commissioner.

Much of this dispute is beyond the control of the Chief and dictated mainly by budgets. The critics demanding that he resolve the matter are generally ignorant that the government is holding the reins, not the Chief; those reins are called the budget.

Regardless, the Chief has broader responsibilities than acquiescing to Union demands. He must operate a Police Force now and into the future, and if he doesn’t have the budget, it would be irresponsible for him to grant the Union’s demands.

We support the wage claim for the Police. They certainly deserve to be highly paid for the job they do; however, that high pay rate should not extend to those who are not on the frontline, and it has always been an anathema that some Police avoid the frontline but receive all the benefits of those protecting us. Although backroom jobs are essential, the operational function is the priority.

Rather than a general pay raise, reviewing and extending specific task allowances would be more equitable and provide a better chance of accommodating them within budget restraints.

The key will be implementing a narrow band of the term ‘Operational’ extending from Constable to Inspector but only applying to those staff who are actively ‘Operational’.

Supported by a well-managed Force Reserve, the organisation’s efficiency can be maintained and even improved within reasonable budget restraints.

Many will be disappointed that their non-operational role does not enjoy the pay scale of those on the front line.

However, a solution is available to all Police classified as non-operational: move to a frontline position.

There are plenty of vacancies.

A POLICE RESERVE WOULD EASE THE BURDEN

A POLICE RESERVE WOULD EASE THE BURDEN

As Victoria Police face the triple-edged sword of budget cuts, a dearth in recruiting, aggravated by a massive rise in the population, these colliding pressure points can inevitably hurt the most vulnerable in society with a systemic drop in police operational capacity.

Any hope of an improved visible police presence any time soon is forlorn.

There is also a temptation for the review announced by the Chief Commissioner to slash and burn.

That will translate into whenever there is a failure of police service delivery, like police not arriving when called, or your local police station is closed, the excuse will be ‘budget cuts’.

Although the excuse may be reasonable, if you’re hanging from a cliff by your fingernails, budget excuses won’t wash.

We have to hope and rely on the Chief Commissioner that his chosen team has the creative acuity to achieve objectives with innovation and creativeness that improves the organisation’s service whilst satisfying the competing pressures.

There is a direct correlation between a falling capability over many years and senior police leadership or lack thereof, and the current industrial imbroglio. All industrial disputes are not only about money and conditions but what also gains traction is a workforce that considers itself under siege because of poor leadership.

In the case of the Police, this is not something new or necessarily caused by the current administration but something that has not been addressed for over a quarter of a century by consecutive administrations that failed to identify the issue, ignored it or relegated it to the too-hard basket, hoping it will go away.

The unfortunate development of the corporate bubble and executives feeling they are elite are just some of the indicators of the current industrial impasse.

The Force review, now mooted, will create a temptation to amalgamate functions, particularly at the coal face. However, they have been tried before and failed the absolute ‘Service delivery’ test.

The focus must be on the senior administration, which has become effectively bloated, inefficient, and ineffective. Failing regularly to accept responsibility is a major concern pandering to the; ‘it’s all their fault, not ours; philosophy.’

This review will undoubtedly be the defining issue of Commissioner Patton’s tenure. He must get this one right.

The whole issue is not helped when Police executives do not appear to know the difference between ‘Service Delivery’ and ‘Service efficiency’, a fundamental and critical knowledge necessity.

This review will undoubtedly be the defining issue of Commissioner Patton’s tenure. He must get this one right.

‘Service delivery’ must always trump ‘Service efficiency’. The organisation’s being is to provide a service, in this case, policing. It is a management role to deliver efficiency in providing that service; however, if efficiency reduces the service, that is marked as a management failure.

The test to any change by this review must pass the ‘Service Delivery’ maxim.

Everybody interested in Policing must assist, whether current or former Police and the combined skills and support for the review is more likely to achieve a better outcome than obfuscation.

The CAA has, for some time, promoted the concept of establishing a Police reserve, which is not dissimilar to the way the military reserve is structured.

Any former member of the Force could apply, as well as some serving members where, due to circumstances, a full-time commitment is not feasible.

The former members of good character could apply to be re-employed in stations and other functions to relieve operational members back to the street.

The reserve members would be reinstated at their previous rank and renumerated in accordance with the current level for that rank/position.

Reserve members would not exercise line command but could advise junior members.

They could perform many functions, and their reinstatement as a particular class means they are again employed by VicPol and would automatically become sworn members unless they have chosen to abrogate their oath.

Reserve members would be employed in consultation with the applicant as many would not be interested in full-time employment but in an arrangement to fit in with their new lifestyle. This is best achieved by a ‘Positions available’ concept.

Serving members may be encouraged to join the Reserve to suit their situations rather than losing them altogether. Some members may need to work less than a five-day week, which they can achieve by transferring to the Reserve.

There is a myriad of other issues that need to be debated and resolved, but the force having the capacity to fill full-time vacant positions even with more than one reserve member and acknowledging that the Reserve members have capacity limitations, the alternative of just leaving the position vacant doesn’t help anybody, particularly the community. A Force Reserve is also cost-effective.

Above all else, the Force must resist the temptation to lower standards to attract more recruits.

This approach is short-sighted, and the negative impact will be felt for decades, where with the current thrust of the three-edged blade, we can only hope, it is short-lived, comparatively.