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.
This makes sense but I can see that there maybe resentment by the current members if the government allows this to happen. I see the government turning this around to suit them by saying we can’t give you the payrise that you want but we have given you the 1,000 extra staff that you have told us that you have told us that you have desperately wanted. So then the current members are now angry at reservists for not getting the payrise in which they deserve.