by CAA | Feb 5, 2025 | Library, Media, Politics, Victoria Police Issues
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.
by CAA | Jul 16, 2024 | Drunk, Family Violence, Library, Road Safety, Victoria Police Issues
Police arrest the thieves, and courts release them. There has to be a better way.
That way is what the CAA calls the G-Tag (Electronic Vehicle tracking).
If the Government won’t bring the Courts into line to do their job, then the community will have to take action.
Every day, we are told of yet another shocking crime or string of crimes to which a Motor car is central, but the government sits on its hands and takes no action apart from the odd manipulation of statistics to deflect criticism.
First and foremost, the judiciary has failed, and its role now must be evaluated based on the ineffectiveness of its penalties by Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
The Key indicator is the primary function of a sentence: general deterrence. However, this has been lost in the mire of so-called diversions, few of which divert the offenders from more crime.
If a judicial officer’s adjudication is below a benchmark performance (KPI), and particularly if the sentencing fails to achieve the primary objective of deterring others, then they need to explain their failure, and where that failure is consistent, they should be removed from the bench.
The reality is that if the circa 20,000 cars and other vehicles that are stolen annually and used by criminals were made unusable for their criminal activities, the theft of cars would drop dramatically, and with it, the crime the vehicles facilitate.
There would not only be a massive crime drop but also a massive impact on car owners’ safety and reduced cost, as the dramatic drop in Victorian fleet thefts would force insurers to lower premiums as the risk factors diminish.
The Courts have failed to reign in crime and blame the government, which, in turn, accuses the Courts.
Additionally, the Government has been made aware of an alternate plan since 2016 but considers the plan not even worthy of discussing with the CAA.
The problem with the plan we agree, challenges the status quo, but the status quo doesn’t help the thousands of victims; the G-Tag will.
See,
https://caainc.org.au/g-tag-a-new-paradigm-in-community-safety
https://caainc.org.au/?s=G-Tag
There is, however, an alternate option: bypassing the government.
The alternative is providing the private sector with the opportunity to implement the G-Tag.
A subscription service to protect vehicles would be cost-effective for owners who could offset some of the cost with reduced premiums from insurers and provide a disabling capacity for vehicles if they are stolen, which could be a viable alternative to waiting for the government.
The money this would save the State purse by reducing crime and processing criminals would justify some relief for those who subscribe to the G-Tag service.
The security industry already operates control rooms that monitor security equipment, and some companies monitor the movement of ankle bracelets, so providing a G-Tag service would not be a significant technological step.
Although technology is unlikely to stop a vehicle from being stolen as soon as the owner is aware, the car can be disabled, making it useless for the crooks.
Most high-end vehicles already have the technology built-in, and other vehicles are relatively cheap to equip.
The disruption to the crook’s plans would deter them from stealing any vehicle with a G-Tag sticker on the window.
The G-Tag can put a vehicle into ‘limp home mode’, reducing its maximum speed to 80 KPH, and then disable the engine when it is safe.
The police can be notified of the incident and organise an interception coordinated with the use of the vehicle’s disabling capacity.
One distinct advantage is that thieves are unlikely to have the opportunity to torch the vehicle, destroying evidence.
A negotiation with the E-Tag operators could make this concept more viable.
It is a big challenge; however, if we wait for the government, it will never happen, and the crooks will continue to operate with gay abandon, and victims will continue to be put at risk because of government inaction.
Whether you are an Uber Driver or a Mum on the school run, we must lift their protection.
The CAA calls on entrepreneurial businesses who might be interested in exploring this concept to contact us at info@caainc.org.au
by CAA | Jul 10, 2024 | Library, Youth
(‘Whack-a-Mole’ is a 1970s arcade-style game that lives up to its name. It consists of Moles popping up out of their burrows randomly and the players trying to wack them with a mallet.)
At a time when the youth crisis is in an out-of-control spiral, irrespective of how the government tries to spin the problem, the Government is using the police force in a futile effort to resolve the issue by forcing them to play ‘Wack-A-Mole‘
Additionally, the government trumpets action, which turns out to be inaction, that the community is supposed to accept, but it is all smoke and mirrors with no clear strategy.
The problem that we face with young people and crime, in general, is that nobody is doing anything about reducing crime before it occurs. They would rather play ‘Wack-a-Mol’,
As reported in the Herald Sun,
- Vehicle thefts have jumped by 25% to 40000.
- 59,000 motorists had valuables stolen from their vehicles.
And the advice for drivers was to lock their cars and hide valuables – the victim’s fault.
These statistics become more concerning yearly – more offences, more victims.
This crime is shared between opportunistic drug addicts to fund their addiction and juveniles out for ‘the thrill’. The crime surge is the fault of weak legislation and poor strategies to combat crime. Blaming the victim is unforgivable.
But never fear. The government has spent five years drafting a new Youth Justice Bill to address the current anomalies in the Judicial system.
The Bill, if enacted in its present form, will add to the crime problem, not diminish it, as its sole focus is diverting young people from the Justice system after they offend, and its 900 pages do not mention once, what can be done with younger children, to divert them from crime. However, it expends a lot of words to remove concepts of accountability and consequences from all young offenders.
It also lifts the age of criminal responsibility to 13 years from 10 years, an ideological whim not only contradicts the empirical evidence published by government agencies but expends no energy on how these children in that underage cohort who commit crimes will be dealt with.
‘Alarming statistics released in June found crimes involving children as young as ten had soared to their highest level since 2010, with a 52.6 per cent spike in offences committed by ten and 11-year-olds.
Children aged 10 to 13 years old were responsible for 84 aggravated burglaries, while those aged 14 to 17 were considered to be “over-represented” in burglaries, assaults, robberies and car thefts – HS 10.7.2024
A cynic may suggest that the statistics don’t show children younger than 10 committing crimes because they are below the legislated age of criminal intent. That cohort will show a 100% decline in children aged 10 and 11 committing crimes when the age is lifted.
Will the government exploit this statistical foible to pretend they’re solving the problem? Doubtless, they will.
With contributions like ‘dob in a mate’ the latest government offering, all we can say is, ‘good luck with that’. However, it points to the disconnect between the government and its advisers and the real world.
The reality is that Police and the community will just have to wait until a perpetrator turns 13 before their criminal endeavours can perhaps be curtailed. On occasions, police in the past have had to wait until a child turns ten before they can be presented to the judicial system to curb their criminal behaviour.
These arbitrary age limits do not necessarily coincide with the child’s acuity development or when a child is acting in concert with others who may be older in the commission of crimes.
They must be scrapped.
Of course, being charged is only part of the problem. The main issues are,
The failure of the Bail Laws, which the Courts say is not their fault but the legislators, is the lamest excuse ever hidden behind, a weak excuse and entirely accurate.
- Failure to hold children to account for their actions.
If criminal behaviour does not have consequences, what motivation exists to change children’s behaviour – talk fests and meetings don’t cut it.
- Failure to apply sanctions for criminality.
The law is based, in part, on a fear (Deterrent factor) that certain unacceptable behaviours attract sanctions imposed by a Court, but illogically, this concept is removed from children, which is a significant part of the problem as they seldom suffer any accurate or effective sanctions.
The future for the children is not looking good; by the time their unlawful behaviour is checked, crime is entrenched in their psyche or soul, and the chances of rehabilitation are problematic.
Easy bail is only one of the many illogical approaches the government has persisted with, as, for example, the most recent absconding of a juvenile bailed on charges of culpable driving causing death after a stolen car he was allegedly driving ploughed into another vehicle, killing the occupant.
The perpetrator absconded within hours of being bailed, and the real fear is that he was behind the wheel of another stolen car. Now in custody, what he did for the three days on the run will no doubt be exposed in due course.
In this matter, the government and the courts have blood on their hands, but will that be enough to have them wake up and do their job in the community’s best interests?
The CAA calls on the government to act before more innocent lives are lost.
- Immediately amend the Bail Act to unshackle the Courts (who will then have no excuse) and follow the New South Wales model of liberalising the ability of the courts to reject applications for the privilege of Bail in appropriate cases.
- Immediately reinstate the offence of breach of bail conditions.
- Immediately abandon the notion of lifting the age for criminal intent. All children develop at different stages; therefore, the age is somewhat irrelevant anyway, and all ages should be removed instead, relying on the common law principle of doli incapaxa, a Latin phrase meaning “incapable of evil”, a defence available to all children. children under 14 years.
- Immediately develop proactive initiatives that divert young people from crime before offending rather than relying on diversion programs after offending.
- Immediately abandon the flawed Youth Justice Bill, which, if enacted, will increase the crime rate.
The ball is now squarely in the Government’s court, and a failure to act as outlined will condemn this government forever.
