What a brilliant idea; why didn’t we think of this earlier?
Kids desensitised to and normalised to drugs, by the drug room just opposite their school in Nth Richmond, and the playgound to dangerous to use, will be able to call in and get a hit on the way home.
Mum can wait outside the injecting room rather than at the school gate.
It took the Green’s Aiv Puglielli to come up with this ridiculous and inane idea. He claims to have ‘expert health advice’. We note that it is not necessarily ‘Medical Advice’; it is more likely that advice would have originated from the drug industry to expand their market.
Mr Puglielli should have stuck to the Arts, where he has a background and left these issues to people that know something about it.
We would question the bona fides of the Greens’ advisers, and you can guarantee they will never raise their heads above the parapet to expose themselves to deserved ridicule.
How ridiculous to even suggest that a child can attend a drug room to shoot up. Is it to be an after-school activity, or will it be introduced as part of the curriculum?
Under this proposal, the Doctors’ Hippocratic Oath would be invoked, and the identity of the child would not be disclosed even to the child’s parents.
If these loopy ideas gain any traction, they will turn our parliamentary system into a joke, and what remaining credibility the parliament has will be lost, a loss it may never recover from.
We have long suspected that some drug apologists are linked to the drug trade and have been corrupted to push pro-drug policies. The rivers of gold that flow in the industry leads inevitably to corruption.
If there is any hope, politicians, irrespective of their ideology, must rise up and call this rubbish for what it is.
This is one of the very few occasions where politicians must put aside ideology for the greater good and regain respect for the political institution.
The State Government appears to be on the fringe of introducing a “safe” drug injecting room (“drug house”) in the CBD. Originally proposed next to Victoria Market (initially supported by Lord Mayor Sally Capp) and now apparently proposed at or near Flinders Street Station. If this occurs, it will become the greatest folly the MCC has introduced to the CBD. An own goal that could ruin the CBD for decades. Indeed the term “safe” in the context of drugs is an oxymoron. Illegal drugs are not safe! The place where you take them may be safe, but that is all. Taking illicit drugs is unsafe (otherwise make them legal), the environment around the place where the user takes them is unsafe… as a result of drug dealers (who will come to sell drugs to the users), criminals of various types hanging around to steal from the users, residents and dealers, the consequential health issues attached to the user and the consequential behaviour of the user which is often threatening to bystanders and emergency services who inevitably have to look after them.
The model for this drug house is one now operating in Richmond. Readers should note on its website: “Once registration and assessment are complete…They wash their hands, are provided with sterile injecting equipment and are given harm reduction advice before they inject their pre-obtained drugs in an allocated booth.” What an invitation for drug dealers to hang around and sell their wares! Users get their drugs elsewhere and where better from next to where you inject. One of the arguments for establishing the drug house is that it saves lives. Rubbish! But there have still been almost 7000 drug-related deaths since being established. Criminals hang out around the centre, break-ins to local residences have increased, and prostitutes are plying their trade in the nearby parks and streets.
The Richmond Drug Centre is attached to a community health centre next to a primary school. Residents nearby have complained of rising drug use and crime. This paper has recently highlighted residents’ concerns which have been brushed over.
The MCC and the State have sat on a report by former Chief Commissioner of Police Ken Ley for many months that apparently supports a drug house. This report appears to have been withheld by the Lord Mayor and Councillors prior to last year’s State election. Why? We do not know. But if it exists, the public and ratepayers have a right to see it. Businesses (especially those near the proposed drug house, need to prepare and not be ill-informed should they need to make decisions about improvements, renewing a lease or buying a property.
Drug use is a major social issue, and that users need to be looked after is not the issue. The issue is how you deal with it, and the only way to do so responsibly is through an integrated drug user strategy. One that treats the user’s immediate health issues sets up a rehabilitation treatment program and gets them off the streets and into safe accommodation. This should be a state lead initiative that has been wanting for decades. It is tough love, but in the end, best for the user and the overall community.
The Community Advocacy Alliance, made up of respected police veterans, says: “Injecting Rooms are neither safe for the addicts nor the community, no matter where you put them, as they do not even rate as a band-aid to the issue. It is even questionable that they save lives.”
They go on to say: “The CAA believes the solution will be based on proactive intervention, law enforcement (not passive avoidance) along with appropriate rehabilitative infrastructure.
The use of Health Orders to place addicts or users in a secure medical facility so that their overall health can be attended to…is the key.”
This is common sense, and the MCC will lead Melbourne into a social and economic abyss if it continues to proceed with setting up a drug house in the CBD. Melbourne contributes a substantial proportion of the nation’s GDP. It serves as a gateway for international trade and investment. Allowing a drug house and the associated criminal activity in the CBD will:
deter businesses and individuals from investing in and locating to the CBD. It will indeed lead to businesses leaving the CBD
Impact the quality of life of residents in the city and deter shoppers and the broader community from coming into the city.
Damage Melbourne’s international reputation and image. This will impact our major events and tourists coming to the city
Lead to a long-term decline in economic activity and a reduction in job opportunities.
Finally, I ask, do any of us want our children or grandchildren to become inured to homelessness, drug addiction, crime and public sex acts?
This is what will happen on our streets if we do not act now to stop it.
It is now inevitable that the argument from the illicit drug apologists will gain sway; you could soon have your own local injecting den with all the outfall the residents of North Richmond have and continue to endure in your neighbourhood.
The Drug problem escalates exponentially because no action is being taken to address it, only to facilitate its growth. More injecting rooms increase drug use leading to more overdoses and more crime to support the habits created, not less.
We believe that due to the latest review of the North Richmond facility, some startling numbers were released that can be used in a spurious argument to expand the project.
And as though the on-ground reality has no bearing on the philosophical and political intent to expand injecting rooms, for the convenience of addicts and users at the expense of the community.
The most generous thing that can be said of the Richmond facility review is that there is no evidence that addicts and users are treated or are released from their addiction at all, and the report even admits that the sixty-odd alleged addicts whose lives were saved because of the room is at best an inflated estimate. They just don’t know the effectiveness.
However, what is not beyond doubt is the facility promotes and facilitates drug use and, moreover, provides a convenient location for dealers to operate.
The City of Yarra has been collecting discarded syringes around the neighbourhood adjacent to the Drug facility. Before the Pandemic, they collected 8,000 per month or 260 per day.
After the Pandemic, that number has skyrocketed to 18,000 a month or 600 daily. This is unequivocal evidence that supports the Richmond resident’s claims of an explosion of drug use around the facility and absolutely debunks any claim the facility reduces harm by reducing drug use.
These numbers do not include the number of syringes dispensed and used within the facility.
What this figure does, is open the window to the extent of the problem with drug addiction that the community of North Richmond is dealing with.
At least 600 or 25 every hour, 24/7 addicts, are shooting up in their neighbourhood, plus the addicts transiting to shoot in the facility; this is truly a pandemic.
We oppose the concept of a safe Injecting room in absolute terms but accept without question that addiction is a medical issue.
Sourcing illicit drugs by addicts and associated unlawful behaviours is unquestionably a Police matter.
It is irrefutable that addicts cannot maintain a severe addiction without resorting to crime, and one of the most prolific crimes is drug dealing. So why wouldn’t they congregate in Richmond, where there is little risk of being charged with dealing?
The current drug honey pot, courtesy of the Victorian Government, an area where drug dealing can occur with minimal risk of prosecution, is unacceptable.
The safe injecting room is an abject failure for the community of North Richmond and Victoria generally.
Using the syringe statistics has a danger of creating a perceived need to replicate these facilities throughout the country and metropolitan community—a need not for the community but for the addicts.
As we have argued before, the current approach to the drug issue supports the drug industry, contrary to what is claimed. The Marketing model for that industry is well-serviced by Government strategies in support of their trade.
The risk to all Victorians is that the Richmond Model is replicated elsewhere.
That model uses the community health centres as their operational base.
Community Health centres are attractive because of their medical resources beyond the supervision of drug use.
We all must be vigilant against the spread of these insidious drug facilitator programs in lieu of the introduction of a quarantine system for addicts.
You will never get an addict to action rehabilitation when high, as in the injecting rooms.
To be effective, the addict must be sober when help is offered to have any chance of acquiescing.
The Community Advocacy Alliance has been restrained in our criticism of the Premier of this State as we respect the democratic process. Still, there comes a time, issues and place where we can no longer remain silent because we would be failing to advocate for the Community.
The Community has every right to expect that our elected officials act lawfully and ethically, delivering the services, infrastructure and good governance the Community expects.
The political machinations orbiting around the latest IBAC findings involving the Premier are just a bridge too far. We need as a community to stand up and be vocal, holding him to account.
We accept that the IBAC Act restricts the ability of IBAC to lay charges against certain people based on the nature of the alleged misbehaviour, noting that similar behaviour by anybody else would not be tolerated. However, given what has been reported in the media on the IBAC, raises severe doubts about the competency of our Legal system to deal with corruption or criminal endeavours.
Although IBAC cannot lay criminal charges in these circumstances, that does not mean there has not been criminal behaviour. There is no absolution of the Premier in the IBAC reports.
Given the information in the public domain, two alleged offences would have a very good prospect of succeeding, and, depending on the Premier’s advice, a third offence and the most serious would apply.
Primarily multiple counts of Misconduct in Public Office seem to be the most prolific offence, and it is arguable the Premier and others have engaged in multiple Conspiracies to commit other criminal offences-most notably, Theft by Deception from the State.
The most recent exposure of the movement of funds to the HSU needs further investigation to see where all the funds ended up and with whom, and was that purpose even legal? Just because the money was moved within the government and union sphere does not necessarily mitigate theft.
The Premier’s behaviour over an extended period of memory malfunctions is also highly questionable because if it is deliberate, it is undoubtedly Perjury when he is speaking under oath and Misconduct in Public Office at other times.
He has repeatedly used memory lapses when questioned under oath.
And there is also the matter of the notes.
Are we to believe that with a posse of advisers, the Premier does not have access to logs or notes, contemporaneous or otherwise and audio recordings of the important decisions he is involved in?
Are we to believe that the Premier is so unprofessional he operates on a wing and a prayer and has no reference material on his conversations on critical matters of State?
If that is the case and he has the compromised memory span that he claims, the lack of records on important issues of the State would rate as deliberate misconduct.
Either he has repeatedly given false evidence under oath or withheld documents from multiple inquiries, all of which amount to multiple offences of Perjury or Misconduct in Public Office, -or his mental acuity is questionable, making him unfit for Office.
He can’t have it both ways.
We know that he has used the memory lapse response before a number of inquiries, and on each occasion, it was reported that he used it multiple times. Although Perjury is rated as an extremely difficult case to prosecute, nevertheless, in this circumstance, each time during each examination he used the memory lapse answer under oath, he potentially committed a further offence.
What makes these allegations of Perjury offences so egregious is their proliferation and the high profile of the person responsible. These acts alone serve to undermine the rule of law and encourage others to perjure themselves in all jurisdictions where sworn evidence is relied upon, without consequences.
It is essential that this matter be tested in Court to determine if the actions amounted to Perjury.
At the very least, there is a ‘prima facie‘ case for which his guilt or innocence must be tested.
Why should the Premier be protected from prosecution when anybody else in the Community would have been charged?
We are not arguing for a change of government but that the law be applied equally to all.
Allegedly we are all equal before the law as a fundamental Human Right. Still, the actions of this State’s legal system have now breached the rights of all other Victorians by not prosecuting the Premier.
Because the IBAC Act says IBAC cannot prosecute, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Chief Commissioner can.
The Parliament can censure him and refer the matter to the DPP or the Chief Commissioner, which must now happen.
It is also imperative to avoid repetition by others in power, that the Premier, when forced from Office by his colleagues, the most likely scenario, is his discretions do not simply disappear with him.
That would be a travesty of justice of monumental proportions and give license to others to behave in a similar way – integrity in government and the Legal system is then severely compromised, and the integrity of both may end up unrecoverable.
The only other alternative, is we will have to rely on the media to achieve the same result through relentless pressure until his colleagues and Party do what the legal system has failed to do
Why, in 2023, are we still sacrificing children? The North Richmond ‘Safe’ Injecting Room’s very site exposes young children to sights no child should ever have to witness. Have any studies been conducted as to the psychological damage these children may suffer from being exposed to the activities of these drug users? If not, why not? The adverse impact on the local population of law-abiding citizens has been devastating. The location puts the community at risk, but the very essence of the zone for police means not only are drug dealers and users protected from arrest, dealers and users have a level of protection not available to local residents.
Locals, including very young children, have been attacked and harassed by drug users, have witnessed dead bodies in the streets, had their properties damaged, and have seen men having oral sex with men. Other sexual activities of every description are committed in open view.
Parents suffer the constant fear of their children being harmed by the presence of contaminated discarded needles and the behaviours of drug users and children themselves suffer similar fears.
The CAA is opposed to, so-called, Safe Injecting Rooms and has promoted an alternative health-based approach to treating the users of illicit drugs. See https://caainc.org.au/safe-injecting-rooms-a-misnomer/. We see jailing offenders as a last resort. However, our pleas for a real effort to dramatically reduce the number of illicit drug users have fallen on deaf ears. The North Richmond injecting room, rather than reducing illicit drug use, actually facilitates the consumption of dangerous drugs, encourages drug dealers and has had minimal success in turning users away from their habit. Of those lives saved, how many of these users administered a very powerful dose because they knew that if they overdosed, help was at hand? Clearly, the government of Victoria cares more about the welfare of drug addicts than about the well-being of the local population and particularly the welfare of young children.
The CAA implores you to use your power to at least have this facility moved to a site away from our kids and to a place that will not impact the community and enter into discussions examining an alternative that will actually reduce drug addiction, not facilitate its growth. Children are too vulnerable and valuable to sacrifice in the interests of users of illicit drugs.
Kelvin (Kel) Glare AO APM Chair Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. Ivan W. Ray Chief Executive Officer
This is what children have to experience in North Richmond on a daily basis, multiple times and worse. Stepping around comatose addicts or being accosted by the vertical ones. Would you let your kids experience this? The families of North Richmond have to, compliments of the State Government. They didn’t get a choice; the addicts do.
The Herald Sun today, Apr 12 2023, reported on the violence surrounding young children involved in violent clashes as part of a ‘Fight Club’ fad operating within the school system. The club and its protagonists are not gender specific.
Organised through social media, these fights appear vicious and common. It comes after the Herald Sun revealed earlier this week that more than 130 brutal fights involving kids had been posted on the Instagram page which celebrates vicious brawls, including more than 30 just in the past week, reported in just one area of Melbourne.
These events involve at least ten schools, and the social media site used has 2000 followers.
These statistics are beyond alarming, and if anybody is naive enough to see this as a school problem, the spill over into the broader community is inevitable; watch out.
Add to that, the complaints from teachers about violence and lack of discipline in the school system directly impacts the learning progress of all students and the safety in the teacher’s workplace. There is little wonder that teachers are hard to recruit. Who wants to go to work with a real risk of getting bashed? No wonder the standard of education is in such decline.
The CAA has raised these issues for a number of years, so there are no excuses for inaction that our community leaders can present – they have been warned ad infinitum, yet have chosen not to act.
It is sad to say that death or acute injury to a student, at school, or a teacher is inevitable. School shootings, the scourge of America, almost will inevitably come to our schools. Perhaps our gun laws may reduce the incidence of firearms, but bladed weapons will be our nemesis.
Putting the collective heads in the sand by those responsible is a disgrace of epic proportions.
This problem is escalating and will not go away unless they act. Stop looking for excuses to divest your responsibility to others; take a leadership position and act; that is supposed to be your job.
When the community realises that the inaction of those with the power to make changes have avoided doing so, and our most valuable resource and future are in decline, they will be looking to lay blame, which could hurt those responsible as much as the kids now suffer.
The violence our children is exposed to can only lead to an upsurge in violence later in life for these children as they see violence as a means to an end.
As an example, it is not rocket science that the children of North Richmond who are being desensitised to the perils of illicit drugs, exposed to the outcomes daily, will lead to many of those children taking up the ‘cool’ life of an addict.
Will the leadership of today take responsibility for those outcomes?
If we think there is an epidemic of Domestic violence, now wait a decade. As children of today enter relationships as adults, the solution to dispute resolution (FDR) will be domestic violence on a scale that will make today’s skyrocketing incidents seem tame.
Inaction by government and police leadership is responsible, and ducking and weaving will not ameliorate the moral responsibility of failure by notable individuals from both entities.
To the current Government and police leadership, the recent headlines about youth violence can only be ignored at your peril.
With over four hundred years of Policing experience and a raft of other disciplines in the CAA, it would be unwise to ignore the warnings and dismiss the solutions we have proffered.
In 2016 we warned of a coming crime tsunami which was ignored, and the prediction eventuated.
Our feedback from the community is that it is getting sick and tired of inaction on critical social areas while less important, on a quantitative scale, are getting the attention.
This is the litany of issues raised by the CAA that have been ignored.
There is no doubt that additional education of students on the negative aspects and risks of drugs is essential, as are support services for those affected. Still, if ever there was an argument for the allocation of Police Resources to schools to work to prevent the problem, then this is it.
In other States, Police are embedded in Secondary Schools as part of a structured Police In Schools Program, but that does not seem to be a worthy allocation of resources in this State. Paradoxically in other States with structured Police In Schools Programs, Crime rates are falling.
Assistant Commissioner Nugent correctly highlights how the drug issue in schools feeds into the ever-increasing crime rate.
We cannot expect teachers to deal with the criminal aspect of the Drug problem in Schools.
Comment;There is no evidence that police actively tried to address this issue- possibly seen as a School problem.
Apart from the obvious advantages of a safer community overall, the proposal to reintroduce the Police In Schools Program to Primary Schools and embed police in Secondary Schools (PISP) would see a substantial increase in safety for teachers.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) has submitted the PISP proposal to both the Government and the Opposition. However, only the Liberal Opposition has embraced and announced the inclusion of a PISP in their policy.
This initiative would be the most effective way to keep our children safe, help protect our educators and reduce stress and achieve better educational outcomes for our children.
Comment; Twelve months later, after multiple representations, no action was taken.
The Herald Sun today, Apr 12 2023, reported on the violence surrounding young children involved in violent clashes as part of a ‘Fight Club’ fad operating within the school system. The club and its protagonists are not gender specific.
Organised through social media, these fights appear vicious and common. It comes after the Herald Sun revealed earlier this week that more than 130 brutal fights involving kids had been posted on the Instagram page which celebrates vicious brawls, including more than 30 just in the past week, reported in just one area of Melbourne.
These events involve at least ten schools, and the social media site used has 2000 followers.
These statistics are beyond alarming, and if anybody is naive enough to see this as a school problem, the spill over into the broader community is inevitable; watch out.
Add to that, the complaints from teachers about violence and lack of discipline in the school system directly impacts the learning progress of all students and the safety in the teacher’s workplace. There is little wonder that teachers are hard to recruit. Who wants to go to work with a real risk of getting bashed? No wonder the standard of education is in such decline.
The CAA has raised these issues for a number of years, so there are no excuses for inaction that our community leaders can present – they have been warned ad infinitum, yet have chosen not to act.
It is sad to say that death or acute injury to a student, at school, or a teacher is inevitable. School shootings, the scourge of America, almost will inevitably come to our schools. Perhaps our gun laws may reduce the incidence of firearms, but bladed weapons will be our nemesis.
Putting the collective heads in the sand by those responsible is a disgrace of epic proportions.
This problem is escalating and will not go away unless they act. Stop looking for excuses to divest your responsibility to others; take a leadership position and act; that is supposed to be your job.
When the community realises that the inaction of those with the power to make changes have avoided doing so, and our most valuable resource and future are in decline, they will be looking to lay blame, which could hurt those responsible as much as the kids now suffer.
The violence our children is exposed to can only lead to an upsurge in violence later in life for these children as they see violence as a means to an end.
As an example, it is not rocket science that the children of North Richmond who are being desensitised to the perils of illicit drugs, exposed to the outcomes daily, will lead to many of those children taking up the ‘cool’ life of an addict.
Will the leadership of today take responsibility for those outcomes?
If we think there is an epidemic of Domestic violence, now wait a decade. As children of today enter relationships as adults, the solution to dispute resolution (FDR) will be domestic violence on a scale that will make today’s skyrocketing incidents seem tame.
Inaction by government and police leadership is responsible, and ducking and weaving will not ameliorate the moral responsibility of failure by notable individuals from both entities.
To the current Government and police leadership, the recent headlines about youth violence can only be ignored at your peril.
With over four hundred years of Policing experience and a raft of other disciplines in the CAA, it would be unwise to ignore the warnings and dismiss the solutions we have proffered.
In 2016 we warned of a coming crime tsunami which was ignored, and the prediction eventuated.
Our feedback from the community is that it is getting sick and tired of inaction on critical social areas while less important, on a quantitative scale, are getting the attention.
This is the litany of issues raised by the CAA that have been ignored.
There is no doubt that additional education of students on the negative aspects and risks of drugs is essential, as are support services for those affected. Still, if ever there was an argument for the allocation of Police Resources to schools to work to prevent the problem, then this is it.
In other States, Police are embedded in Secondary Schools as part of a structured Police In Schools Program, but that does not seem to be a worthy allocation of resources in this State. Paradoxically in other States with structured Police In Schools Programs, Crime rates are falling.
Assistant Commissioner Nugent correctly highlights how the drug issue in schools feeds into the ever-increasing crime rate.
We cannot expect teachers to deal with the criminal aspect of the Drug problem in Schools.
Comment; There is no evidence that police actively tried to address this issue- possibly seen as a School problem.
Apart from the obvious advantages of a safer community overall, the proposal to reintroduce the Police In Schools Program to Primary Schools and embed police in Secondary Schools (PISP) would see a substantial increase in safety for teachers.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) has submitted the PISP proposal to both the Government and the Opposition. However, only the Liberal Opposition has embraced and announced the inclusion of a PISP in their policy.
This initiative would be the most effective way to keep our children safe, help protect our educators and reduce stress and achieve better educational outcomes for our children.
Comment; Twelve months later, after multiple representations, no action was taken.
What a shocking headline, and to think this is the tip of the iceberg.
Most perpetrators are children, so the response is even more alarming than the problem.
The implied strategy to prosecute indicates the failed Law and Order principles applied in this State, where it is more important to prosecute than prevent the offence in the first place.
Many perpetrators, children as young as ten, have barely learnt that there can be consequences to their actions and charging a few kids will not help many victims.
To argue that it will be a deterrent is absolute rubbish.
The severity and the effect of the problem must not be understated. It can devastate the victim, but handling it in a draconian fashion will inevitably lead to more significant problems.
We must be about preventing or managing the problem.
Comment; In 2018 we did not predict that any government would be so inept as to raise the age of criminal responsibility, but they are considering doing so. The consequences of that flawed proposal are yet to be fully realised. But this shocking revelation in relation to stalking only further motivated the CAA to take action, and that is when we decided in 2019 to act where VicPol and the Government would not.
The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) proposes developing a structured school-based program entitled the Police Veterans in Schools Program (PVISP). The pilot program aims to identify the feasibility of using retired and former police members to deliver a program to teach children community values, the role of police and the law and a suite of victim reduction strategies. Central to this program is building relationships between young people and police so that respect can be developed for the policing function.
Comment; From frustration and inaction by VicPol, the CAA designed and built a School-based program to be delivered by Police Veterans to dovetail with the State school’s curriculum. The CAA recruited a number of Schools who were very enthusiastic and equally enthusiastic retired police to operate a Pilot to demonstrate the program’s effectiveness. But unfortunately, the day the program was to start, COVID hit, stopping the program.
From day one VicPol was invited to be involved in the CAA initiative.
On Feb 6 2020, The Age education editor, Adam Carey, reported that a global survey shows Australian classrooms are among the least disciplined in the world.
Learning time is lost to noise and disorder, and many students cannot work well in class.
Australia ranked 70th out of 77 participating nations in the OECD’s 2018 index of disciplinary climate.
Coupled with the abysmal level of Australian students learning Maths, it is high time that discipline is reintroduced into all classrooms.
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) will introduce police veterans into selected schools in 2020. Our program (PVISP) was launched on Nov 23 2019, and sought to instil in students the basic tenets of good citizenship and provide students with the skills to avoid becoming involved in crime or being victimised.
Comment; How much better position would we now be in had these early warnings been heeded? To blame COVID is an absolute cop-out, as a little creative application could have introduced the concept to the school population and would have helped and been superior to the current approach. But we are now twelve months out of COVID, and still, inaction is the outcome. How many warnings must there be?
Commissioner Ashton’s letter to the School Principals was blatantly designed to undermine the Police Veteran’s School volunteers. He set out a broad raft of mainly reactive claims that allegedly are applied somehow to schools.
The problem is schools generally know nothing about it. It can only be described as spin.
School principals that have contacted us are either angry or confused because they never see what Ashton claims to be happening. Instead, they embraced the Police Veterans In Schools Program (PVISP).
Comment; Even with Ashton’s letter to schools criticising and distancing VicPol from the program, most schools still wanted to proceed, if only on an informal basis. Aggravating the letter, an internal memo was sent by VicPol to all police stations directing them not to cooperate with schools involved in the program or members of the CAA. Even so, the school’s commitments generally did not wain; however, COVID ended that.
Victoria, do not underestimate the importance of the announcement by Chief Commissioner Patton of a Police in Schools Program (PISP) (Herald Sun 24/3/21).
This change in the policing approach is very significant and will have a positive impact on the lives of us all.
The failure of former Police Chief Commissioners to re-implement this important Policing strategy is partly responsible for the increased crime rates in past years, particularly in serious crimes committed by juveniles.
The reintroduction of a structured PISP has been the cornerstone and the basis for the formation of the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA), which I have the privilege to chair.
As a group, we have worked for six years for this outcome, and we unreservedly congratulate Chief Commissioner Patton for reintroducing this program.
At this time, we were very heartened when the current Chief Commissioner, Shane Patton APM announced that VicPol would finally implement a formal Police schools program for Victoria.
Comment; Unfortunately, two years later, we are yet to see the Chief Commissioners’ commitment realised.
We do not question the commitment and intent of the Chief as we believe he was genuine. Still, we are advised that he struck headwinds from other Senior executives who coincidently featured in the era when former Commissioner Nixon cancelled the project originally. Ashton followed through attempting to stop the reintroduction, all be it by veterans not impacting the Police resource argument.
The objectors can be easily identified by their lack of policing skills and poor understanding of proactive policing, the most effective type. The need to replace these people with enlightened and competent executives has never been more urgent.
Victoria Police have rolled out justification for not introducing a formal police schools program, and the list of police activities in schools at first glance is impressive until closer examination reveals a huge serving of spin is all it is.
Police attending schools on an ad-hoc basis with no structured curriculum is both inane and inept akin to smoke and mirrors. It is also the easy way out, just playing with the kids.
It is flawed dramatically, with no ability to measure outcomes or coordinate and target issues of concern with no ability to modify to rising challenges.
The current approach is similar Police Lecture Squad of many years ago. This allegedly highly trained Police team visited schools on a full-time basis and prided itself on its specialist status.
It featured prominently in Annual Reports and was seen as the frontline in working with kids.
This Team were briefed about a severe problem in a particular school and tasked to rearrange their schedule to address the issue urgently.
After much resistance, the Team arranged to see the school at an assembly of the whole school. (Avoiding confronting the age group responsible for the concerns)
To the amazement and embarrassment of their supervisors, the Team presented a short dissertation on pedestrian road safety and did not address or mention the serious issue the school faced.
As a direct result, the Team was disbanded and transferred to Operational Duties.
Where this Chief Commissioner is facing headwinds either in executive management or at the coordinating level, those placing the roadblocks or are unable to perform their task must be removed, and competent people deployed to the function.
This question is not an allegation and is posed in response to an article that appeared in the Guardian on the 12th of May 2021 under the headline ‘Queensland police discriminated against 200 potential male recruits in favour of women’ and sent to the CAA by a concerned reader of our recent article ‘Police staffing faces a perfect storm’.
Whether this has applied in Victoria, we do not know, but anecdotal information has been consistent that male recruit applicants are routinely discarded without giving a reason. They have apparently not been advised of any deficiencies so that they can address them, which seems unfair.
Moreover, the number and ratio of Police Training squads is no firm indication as to whether there is discrimination because we do not know if all the female recruits have been selected on merit and the males used to fill up the numbers.
This leads to the suspicion that an ‘aspirational ‘(euphemism for discrimination) gender quoter system may be being applied in Victoria.
The Guardian article reports on the findings of the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission which said, ‘…the state police service’s 50/50 recruitment strategy resulted in discriminatory practices being used against male candidates.’
As a result of the findings, three QPS employees responsible for the practice have been suspended, and a fourth had already left the service.
Interestingly the role of those suspended QPS employees and their rank were not disclosed. However, the Corruption Commission was clear on where the problems lay, senior command.
We would like to be reassured that this process has not been in action in Victoria because if it has, then it is inevitable that the position will be challenged at some stage.
Building transperancy in to the system is essential.
If it is in operation, either officially or otherwise, it is in direct contravention of the Equal Opportunities Act 1995 Section 16, which prohibits discrimination on a number of Attributes – amongst the list of attributes is gender and race, along with a number of others.
Equal Opportunities Act 1995
Part 4—When is discrimination prohibited?
Division 1—Discrimination in Employment
16 Discrimination against job applicants
An employer must not discriminate against a person—
(a) in determining who should be offered employment; or
(b) in the terms on which employment is offered to the person; or
(c) by refusing or deliberately omitting to offer employment to the person; or
(d) by denying the person access to a guidance program, an apprenticeship training program or other occupational training or retraining program.
Alarmingly, potential recruits in Victoria spend nearly a thousand dollars preparing for their assessment.
Spending that sort of money, it is reasonable that the applicants can be confident the selection process is fair and legal. With the cost, apart from being a clear disincentive, it eliminates many potential recruits who are financially disadvantaged.
We struggle to find any other career stream where applicants have to cover the costs of the employer in their assessment.
Being poor is not an egregious attribute. Arguably, people in this cohort may be better equipped for a Policing role with their life experiences with perhaps compassion and understanding. It also disadvantages specific ethnic and other sectors of the community.
The discrimination against this group shrinks the potential recruiting pool.
Recruiting for any Police Force is a critical function and determines the future of that organisation; therefore, it is imperative that all recruits are treated equally and according to the Law.
Applying discrimination in the recruiting process is unconscionable, given the expectations of successful recruits.
The community reasonably expects Police to act impartially without fear or favour, including swearing an oath to that effect. It expects the same from the organisation.
The CAA sincerely hopes that the Queensland experience has not operated in Victoria.
If it has, the community is entitled to know and needs to be reassured that the matter is fixed and those responsible have been dealt with.
Starting a career in the shadow of processes based on inequality or bias is no way to expect good outcomes, particularly when it is in direct contravention of Legislation. That inequity and bias can be ingrained at the start of a police career suggests it is unlikely that it will not have a deleterious effect on the individual’s performance during their career.
A Police member performing their duty does not police only one sector of the community, but all, and must apply the Law equally. Therefore, it matters not the gender, ethnicity, or other personal traits of applicants; what matters is the application of the Law.
That the makeup of a Police Force is from a broad church is a good thing, but when quotas are applied, it is counterproductive.
The CAA has no issue with and welcomes female Police recruits to the organisation, as it does for any ethnicity or from anywhere on the social economic scale: the Force is better for it.
However, we feel that any discrimination is repugnant and reflects poorly on the organisation as it places a shadow over many members who never know whether they were appointed on merit, gender, or ethnic-based quota systems.
This does not lead to a cohesive and effective workforce.
It is of serious concern to the community that Victoria Police is apparently having difficulty recruiting sufficient numbers to fill the vacancies created by retirements and other staff exits.
Not only will the community feel the impact of the Police not being available to respond to their needs, but Police will endure substantial frustration not having proper numbers available, with an increased workload falling on those still there. This will substantially accelerate the loss of members through stress-related issues.
We do not need to look too far over the horizon to see a perfect storm brewing into an untenable situation or even a crisis for the Force, and the community, because they are both inextricably linked.
The four significant contributors converging are.
Stress on Police
There has been, and continues to be, an escalation in Police leaving due to stress-related issues.
Recruits are difficult to attract.
The Force is having difficulty attracting suitable recruits in the current employment environment.
Public employee staff cuts
The most recent announcement by the Government to make a substantial cut in Public Service employees, with, at this stage, emergency services, Police, ambulance and Fire services not been quarantined. The impact will be devastating.
Impact of Migration
And to magnify the impact of these issues, the net migration intake has exploded, with hundreds of thousands of migrants arriving in Victoria.
What can be done? Quite a lot, actually, and putting one’s head in the sand waiting for the inevitable is not one of them. Secondly, VicPol, as tempting as it may be, must not lower its standards but devise creative ways to cover this shortfall. Altering standards is short-sighted and will lead to worse outcomes down the track. Kicking the can down the road is not a good management strategy.
Stress on Police
In our view, there has been less than appropriate management for many members suffering from stress over an extended period. Management seemingly takes the easy way out and funnels members with stress out of the job rather than the more difficult task of facilitating or working with clinicians to overcome the issue. Management lacks the capacity to be innovative and create pathways for solutions to help relieve the stress on individuals, and that anomaly must be addressed
Many members who have left suffering PTSI have two common threads.
Police management was a major contributor to the degree of their stress injury, and
Following close behind were the insurers and either Workover or Gallagher Bassett, contributing to their issues.
Some sufferers seemed to have been more affected by the above two issues than the issues that caused their stress in the first place. If that seems a contradiction, it is, but they are both issues that should be capable of being addressed relatively easily with VicPol management commitment. Somewhere in the order of fifty per cent of the aggravating problems could be reduced substantially, improving the chances of retaining the member as a worthwhile contributor.
We have always believed that expecting a person suffering, either suspected or confirmed PTSI, to negotiate on their own behalf is unconscionable; they are injured. So instead, each member must be appointed a case manager to assist them with making sound decisions. Implementing such a scheme is essential, but the advocate must be given influence within the organisation, or otherwise, they will be ineffective.
A case manager needs the minimum following attributes;
Maturity -intimate knowledge of Police culture -deep understanding of Force policies, procedures and structure – advanced life skills – proven leadership and communication skills.
Former senior Police officers would be ideally suited for this task.
Recruits difficult to attract.
The current employment environment and the image trashing VicPol has suffered in recent years are forces working against the flow of recruits.
The current marketing campaign’s underlying message is ‘ come play with our toys’.
That approach has been tried before without remarkable success and, on some levels, is insulting to the calibre of recruits VicPol would want to attract.
A campaign ‘’are you good enough’ will pay closer to the psych of the recruits VicPol should favour.
Anecdotal feedback suggests that police veterans’ children, who should be a fertile recruiting ground felt they were discriminated against in the recruiting process.
Whether this is a fair criticism, we do not know, but we do know little effort is made to provide a pathway for this potential market.
Although there are signs of improvement, the treatment of veterans by all levels of VicPol has been very negative and also contributed to this resource not producing the number of recruits it could.
Public employee staff cuts.
As unpalatable as this is, it will probably only be the Police Association that attacks the Government; VicPol can’t.
However, VicPol can be very smart. These cuts are all about saving money for the Government.
This is work for specialist Actuarial and Financial analytical experts working with creative Police management generally but more specifically in recruiting and staff resorucing.
VicPol, to its credit, started the move towards establishing a viable reserve, now advertising for former Police to return for a specialised task. That will be an economic saving while achieving Force objectives.
While small-scale, it can be built on.
Although marketing this first approach is a bit rough around the edges, arguably insulting applicants before they consider the offer is not a sensible approach. Nevertheless, it is a positive move and should be lauded, not criticised, by a minority of veterans, as is currently the case.
A stumbling block often put forward is that Police veterans are no longer sworn Police.
For a very long time, Police who had retired retained their Certificate of Identity. The privilege of retaining their ID has never been abused by the thousands of Veterans who have kept them, it is a respect thing.
The same would apply if the Police Regulation Act was amended so that Police veterans retained their status as sworn. At the discretion of the Chief Commissioner, who may withdraw the privilege from individuals if circumstances arise.
The judicious use of these Veterans would save money while maintaining and improving the police service. Retired members are often a bit physically frayed through age, but that does not affect their mental acuity; it just means they can’t jump fences chasing crooks anymore, probably the same for many older members still serving.
It is hoped that VicPol is closely looking at the Military Reserve model for inspiration rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
Impact of Migration
The number of migrants that will be calling Victoria home over the next little while is bordering on scary, particularly if you are charged with the responsibility of ensuring law and order for this new cohort that will come with its own set of cultural and other values that may not be compatible with Australian values or laws.
Of course, VicPol has been dealing with this issue for many years very successfully, as we are a migrant country and welcome their contribution. But we do not recall a time when so many are likely to arrive with issues that we cannot predict . While many commentators focus on the lack of infrastructure to accommodate the large influx, nobody seems to have applied their minds to the impact on Policing.
From a Policing perspective this influx is a bit like getting kicked when you are already on the ground.
Policing could be overwhelmed, leading to chaos.
The migration issue is a classic political move where one arm of the Government makes a decision to serve its needs, and dealing with the consequences is hived off to another level where the pain is really felt.
What we have set out is the prediction of a perfect storm bearing down on VicPol, the damage that may be caused is perhaps irreversible.
The CAA is alerting the organisation so that planning to deal with this perfect storm to be faced, can be escalated to the highest priority to minimise the inevitable damage.
Do you remember the shocking case of two-year-old James Bulger?
1993 James was abducted, tortured and murdered by two young boys. The murder happened in the UK, and Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were convicted for this atrocious crime. They were both ten years old when the offence occurred. The high-profile 1993 British case horrified the world, everybody was rightly stunned as to how that could happen, but it did.
James Bulger being abducted by Thompson and Venables.
2017 An eleven-year-old boy was charged with Murdering Patrick Slater in a brawl in Perth.
2020 Solomone Taufeulungaki, a Melbourne Teenager, was murdered by a gang of eleven, including two thirteen-year-olds. They have all been charged with Solomone’s murder.
Melbourne Teenager Solomone Taufeulungaki was murdered by children
2021. Five young people charged with Murder in Sydney, boys aged 13,14,15,13 and a girl aged 15, were apparently the perpetrators, all charged with the murder of a sixteen-year-old boy.
2023 Media report that a 13-year-old was charged with the murder of his 4-year-old sibling in Danville, Virginia, US. The 13-year-old was charged with murder after suffocating their sibling and confessing to the crime.
2023 The report (H/S 16/03/23 p.22) of the murder of a twelve-year-old girl by classmates aged twelve and thirteen who confessed the crime. The victim was stabbed thirty times and dumped in a wooded area.
In this incident, offenders were aged twelve and thirteen and was particularly gruesome and horrific; highlighting the folly of increasing the age of criminal culpability to fourteen.
This murder occurred in Germany, where the age of criminal responsibility has been lifted to fourteen, and neither perpetrator can be charged, raising some very interesting issues for Victoria, currently considering the same regressive move.
Will the victim’s family face being confronted by the perpetrators in their community?
How will the family cope knowing the murderers were not punished or even tried?
What happens if the perpetrators claim innocence? Their matter is never tried so they will be forever tarred with the title murderer? The legal maxim, innocent until proven guilty, may not reconcile with the Court of Public opinion.
What happens to the perpetrators? The sheer brutality requires the community to be protected.
Clearly, the police would have no power to intervene in any continuing offending, so who does?
We accept that these offences are not an everyday occurrence. Still, they are so brutal when they happen that the community cannot and will not tolerate this decriminalisation as part of being an enlightened society – particularly for the families of those who, as a result, have their loved ones’ lights put out, brutally and permanently.
These random examples are just a few of what happens, and it happens here, so we would be extremely foolish to take the ‘won’t happen here’ path.
It has and will continue to happen; the uncomfortable truth for the social dreamers is that as much as we might wish it, it is inevitable.
This current push in Victoria has the hallmarks of another Social construct that is not well thought out and devoid of an understanding of the consequences and reality.
The number of children aged 10-14 charged in 2007 was just over 10% (of all young people charged), but by 2016, the trend had the figure at 4.3%, according to the Crime Statistics Agency Vic.
Our current strategies are working, although they could be improved upon; why dabble, build on a solid foundation if you want enhanced results.
As the law currently stands in Victoria, a child over ten and under fourteen cannot be charged with a criminal offence unless they knew the alleged act was wrong when they did it. The safeguard of having an independent person/ parent present when the child is interviewed, to our knowledge, has never been challenged.
This proposal is like throwing the baby out with the bath water, inane.
There is no doubt that youth crime has grown overall, but then so has the community, and the Police Cautioning program, its years of success, with its low recidivism rate remaining the cornerstone of this multi-discipline approach in guiding young people away from crime. Still, it is not designed to deal with serious crimes committed by the very young, which has to remain the purview of the Courts.
The following questions we pose for the Government.
What mechanisms will be in place to protect the community?
What mechanisms will be designed to help victims?
What do police do with the child?
What protections exist to allay litigation for the victim or the perpetrator?
What strategies prevent criminals from exploiting and using children to commit crimes, particularly in the drug scene?
Germany has made a grave mistake with their approach, lifting the age to fourteen; there is no empirical data even to hint that the current system in Victoria of the age of responsibility is an issue.
A home invasion where victims are woken to find perpetrators in their houses is extremely frightening. However, this scare is not mitigated because the perpetrators are subsequently determined to be children. The victims will be just as terrified in some circumstances fearing for their life, irrespective of the age of the offenders. A list of Home invasions allegedly committed by children under fourteen would be too long to detail here.
The danger increases for the victim if the perpetrators are young, as they do not understand all the consequences of their actions. That is an irrefutable fact.
We have no issue with, and support developing strategies to reduce the incidence of juvenile offending and support any efforts in this area, and equally support the current multi-discipline approach to reduce the likelihood of young people reoffending.
However, we strongly reject the current proposal, which effectively removes the ability of police to give a formal caution where the child, the parents, and professionals can be brought together to assist the child’s direction and also completely ignores the rights of victims and the broader impact on the community. The risk of escalating child criminality is just too great.
We do strongly recommend that a formal and structured police-in-schools program be revisited as a preventative initiative with the added advantage that the assistance for the children can be coordinated with the schools bringing police and the professionals together to achieve better outcomes, focusing on prevention and follow-up of children cautioned, improving the outcomes for children. Such a program also educates children in the pitfalls of being involved in anti-social behaviour in all its forms and encourages their formal education.
Additionally, this program will support School staff confronted by children or parents and create an overall safer school environment for all, to improve educational outcomes overall.
So let’s hope sensible, pragmatic ideas prevail and raising the age of criminal responsibility is not pursued.
Premier – don’t do it.
The CAA would be happy to assist the Government in achieving a workable plan with reduced risks to all.
Public drunkenness is now under partisan political consideration—another half-baked approach to Public Policy.
Drunkenness has been a community issue since time immemorial, and there is no empirical data to show it is any worse or otherwise than it has been for many decades, relative to the size of the population.
Decriminalising public drunkenness is fixing a problem that does not exist to any significant degree.
As public drunkenness can be confused with homelessness, vagrancy, mental illness and drug abuse, it is, therefore, sensible that the ‘sobering up’ process should be done under medical supervision, which the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) supports. Equally, because the likelihood of belligerent behaviour is inclined to be more prevalent with drunkenness, securing and safety of these people and the community is and must remain a Police responsibility.
Once the affected person settles and the community is safe, the police can hand them to a facility where clinicians take responsibility.
This whole policy seems to have been designed by people without experience with drunks in the field.
Perhaps a little research should be undertaken, and then the proponents of this social adjustment may just find the number of persons convicted each year for drunkenness as a percentage of the population is meagre. And of those arrested and charged, even fewer are actually convicted, and no record of their indiscretion is recorded.
We reject absolutely the need for racial profiling in this process. Irrespective of the drunk’s heritage or race, they all need the same care.
Exposing the naivety of this proposal, the Herald Sun reports, “Patients at the sobering up site can only be taken with their consent and police or paramedics will need to step in if they become a safety risk or need urgent care.”
This statement alone raises very serious questions and exposes a lack of knowledge of a drunk person’s usual demeanour or the law.
With decriminalising drunkenness, the Police have no power to ‘Step-in’ when the contractor’s management of the drunk goes pear-shaped.
Drunks always consider they are not drunk enough to need care or admit to what they have consumed.
A person who is perceived to be drunk cannot give Informed consent at law.
Entering into a debate about sobriety, consent or otherwise, is a recipe for belligerence.
Our experience is it would be a rare drunk who would agree to the time out in the drunk tank.
How can a government sub-contractor physically intervene with a drunk?
What happens when a drunk is involved in a crime, either as a victim or a perpetrator – it does happen?
A serious risk assessment for contractors out on the street without powers is a disaster waiting to happen. The legal minefield this opens up for the liability of the government and contractors is breathtaking.
Another legal minefield will occur when the drunk decides they are sober enough to leave the facility, but the clinicians know they are not. Holding them even with their uninformed consent would be unlawful. (currently, Police have four hours to detain somebody who is drunk.)
Contractors will find difficulty hiring or retaining staff for this high-risk and filthy foul job.
Another small matter is suitable transport for drunks. The inevitable mess that often is associated with their transport is why police use a Divisional Van that can be hosed out. Putting a drunk in a traditional vehicle is impractical as vomit and other bodily fluids often exuded by drunks tend to permeate every nook and cranny and cannot be removed easily.
The consequence of placing multiple drunks in a facility not properly designed, quasi cells, will lead to inevitable conflict and a huge risk to clinicians.
All police know that when it is determined that a person is drunk, they must be decisive, not enter into debate and secure the drunk immediately to minimise the risk of injury to the drunk, the Police or the public. This skill is learnt and cannot be assumed to exist with untrained subcontractors. A questionnaire is no substitute for years of onsite experience.
The police power of arrest for drunk and disorderly must be left in place to protect the drunks, the Police and the public.
A pattern is now evolving with Political police. This is currently developing into the go-to solution for government initiatives. These new ‘Drunks Police’ have all the hallmarks of another enforcement arm of the government, as we experienced during the COVID pandemic.
Every Victorian should be very concerned about this move as it can lead to a Socialist state policed by Political apparatchiks who are not accountable to the State but to a political party. Untrained but politically accountable without independence to apply the drunks policy impartially.
Rather than contracting out these services, perhaps that funding should be applied to Policing and Ambulance services rather than an expensive contracting arrangement with our money, or will that money be borrowed?
With minimal cost, ‘Drunk Tanks’ are the answer and are legally more palatable. Drunks or other intoxicated people can be placed in clinicians’ care at these Tanks, and the problem is effectively solved.
It certainly gives the impression that those pushing these reforms care little about the individuals or do not comprehend the likely consequential outcomes and effects.
What is most disturbing is that the government is seeking solutions from bidding contractors, “..bidders have also been asked detail how their staff will respond to difficult situations.” Herald Sun 15th March ’23.
This proposition is preposterous, to say the least – how does a proper tendering process work if the bidder writes the policy? There is no way this can be an efficient or reasonable tendering process, with each bidder making their own rules, and it is an admission beyond doubt that the government does not know what it is doing and hopes a contractor will.
This issue has a whiff of appeasing a small cabal of extremists who claim to represent all of us. Well, they do not.
The only plan we can detect is a plan to introduce unnecessary change, popular with a small number of social reformers, intent on breaking down the structure of our democratic society and, in turn, our democracy, with crime and substance abuse rampant, destroying a sizeable ever-growing cohort of wasted lives at an astronomical cost to the community.
Drunk Tanks are like Drug shooting galleries – they do not address the issue but perpetuate it.
It seems obvious the extremist’s grand plan is to weaken society, allowing the growth of autocratic leadership to determine what is best for the rest of us; the problem is that they do not.
The horrifying concern is that the same protagonists pushing these reforms also push defunding the Police. The CAA executive has attended meetings where these issues were raised.
That social experiment has already been tried overseas and failed miserably, which has cost those communities more to rebuild Policing; one problem is the difficulty of very few recruits availing themselves of policing as a career, having seen what happened in the defunding period.
As far as we can tell, the issue of public drunkenness has arisen from one incident where a drunken person self-harmed in a police cell after being arrested for drunkenness.
As sad as that is, that was not the fault of the Police, or the existence of the Offence of Drunk and Disorderly, as we believe no evidence would have excluded the self-harm happening at any other facility, time or place and that drunkenness itself far too often leads to self-harm for which benign arrest is often the only viable solution.
Police see their intervention with somebody drunk in a public place as a Police function, but the sobering up process is a health issue.
Given the demands for service, the idea that drunks can be conveyed home or to some safe place by Police or ambulance is ludicrous.
If changes are to be made, they must be well-considered and practical to avoid numerous unintended consequences.
We strongly support the concept of a ‘Drunk Tank with’ medical oversight. That will improve the safety of the Drunks and the community. Instead of putting drunks in a cell, police can put them in a drunk tank for their four-hour sobering up.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
