NEWS: Herald Sun - 3/03/09 New police chief says drug war unwinnable

[sunshine swimmer]

whens QLD's break going to come!

 

[phase_dancer]

whens QLD's break going to come!

The strongest oppposition to such a change could very well come from Qld as we have both the CMC and the ACC based here. Many of their recommendations have been made into law, laws which have expanded analogue legislation, and reclassified MDMA as schedule 1.

 

[taita]

i tend to agree with what phase has said here he seems to know what he is talking about

 

[belarki]

I just read this and thought it was somewhat related to the discussion in this thread

Cannabis laws cause harm: Aussie expert
Wed Mar 18 2009
By Valkerie Mangnall
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=785628

An Australian academic says many of the problems associated with cannabis stem from prohibition.

Many harms associated with cannabis use result from prohibition rather than the drug itself, an Australian academic has told a United Nations review of drug policy.

Professor Robin Room, a sociologist at the University of Melbourne's School of Population Health has spent much of the past week telling meetings in Vienna that international conventions on cannabis are out of touch and do little to influence the number of users.

Prof Room said while penalties were generally low for cannabis use and possession globally, young people and minorities were more likely than other groups to become caught up in the legal system.

Arrests caused significant suffering, such as personal and family humiliation, as did convictions, which often excluded people from certain jobs and activities.

"A lot of young people's lives get messed up because of arrests over something that is almost impossible to overdose with and where its possible harm is of medium seriousness," Prof Room said.

"This is a system that doesn't really make much sense in terms of the modern world.

"Minorities are more likely to get caught up in being arrested in comparison with the patterns of use. The patterns of use aren't so different between kids from poor minorities and middle class kids."

Substantial government resources are also spent on enforcing prohibition.

The findings are part of a report, commissioned by the UK-based Beckley Foundation, a charitable trust which advocates an evidence-based approach to minimising the harms associated with drug use.

Prof Room was one of five authors on the report, which brought together a range of experts to present an overview of scientific evidence on cannabis and policies controlling it.

The aim was to offer policy makers options for change and make recommendations for international law reform on the fringes of the UN's review in Austria of its strategy on narcotics since 1988.

"We're laying out the options for the political process to consider," Prof Room said.

"If you were starting to build a system now with what current knowledge there is about different substances, you would be much more likely to have alcohol and tobacco included in the prohibition regime in terms of harm."

Prof Room said the degree of control on cannabis was disproportionate to the harm associated with its use.

"If you compare it with other substances, both legal and illegal, it's relatively low down the order of how much harm there is from the substance," he said.

"Yes, there are health problems from cannabis and probably the ones most to worry about are, it's not a good idea to drive a car when you're high on cannabis, and to some extent the problems from people becoming dependent on it."

Prof Room said changing cannabis laws globally would be "a hard slog".

One of the reasons was that governments often saw using the drug as a passing phase, as illustrated when several UK cabinet ministers in 2007 admitted to smoking it in their youth.

"The reaction around cannabis depends on the country and the circumstances," Prof Room said.

"There's often a `ho-ho' response, `we were all young once'."

Politicians were often also concerned about sending out "the wrong message" if they called for decriminalisation or state regulation.

"What we've found is they don't need to worry because the young people aren't paying attention," Prof Room said.

"There's almost no relationship between what the policy is and how many people are using it."

Any countries wanting to reform cannabis laws to the point of regulating the industry would have to break UN conventions which say they must prohibit production and supply.

 

[stevo279]

The right man for the job

 

[hoptis]

Top cop Overland to hold online forum
John Silvester
May 7, 2009 - 11:06AM

Police will swap dragnets for the internet tomorrow when Chief Commissioner Simon Overland holds his first online forum open to the public.

Between 1pm to 2pm people can ask Mr Overland any questions or raise issues of concern in the first blog of its type in Victoria.

The online discussion will take place on Victoria Police's new online news site http:www.vicpolicenews.com.au/myplace.

People who want to be at the start of the queue can log on early and email questions and thoughts to Mr Overland.

When he was appointed in March, he said he would embrace the internet to open direct lines of communication with police and the public.

But he has promised not to Twitter.

The Age

Late notice but I just saw this, if you want to ask him anything.

 

[fortehlulz]

I've met both Miss Piggy and Simple Simon. Christine's a very nice person, Simon is up himself something shocking.

Let's put the current and previous commissioner in perspective shall we?

Christine was chased out of Sydney in no small part for ballsing up Operation Puccini in Cabra. Simon was chased out of the plastic fantastic federales for being a backstabbing dog.

Both came in from the outside.

Christine was female in a strongly archetypal 'bloke' job. Simon is a homosexual in a strongly archetypal 'bloke' job.

Both were picked over Noel Ashby and Paul Mullett who had much more experience, but came to grief over Operation Briars... now, if Ashby did leak details, that's all well and good, but take it from someone who knows... the day the shit hit the fan, Simon was in Christine's ear from the word go... it makes you wonder, was Ashby targetted for investigation because he was dirty, or because Vicpol and/or the state government didn't like the prospect of old school cops becoming chief comissioner?

 

[hyroller]

^^^^ lol. the mind boggles at the above post.

i've worked in banks before, and know from ample first-hand experience that they are hot beds for politics. so i can only imagine how that plays out on a comparatively mammoth scale within an organisation like Vicpol.

one thing i do know is that backstabbing dogs seem to always rise above, for some god-unknown reason. i won't insinuate sexual favours, but indeed the mind does explore each and every option when mulling over the contributing factors toward a particular outcome....

 

[pinothippy]

I've met both Miss Piggy and Simple Simon. Christine's a very nice person, Simon is up himself something shocking.

Let's put the current and previous commissioner in perspective shall we?

Christine was chased out of Sydney in no small part for ballsing up Operation Puccini in Cabra. Simon was chased out of the plastic fantastic federales for being a backstabbing dog.

Both came in from the outside.

Christine was female in a strongly archetypal 'bloke' job. Simon is a homosexual in a strongly archetypal 'bloke' job.

Both were picked over Noel Ashby and Paul Mullett who had much more experience, but came to grief over Operation Briars... now, if Ashby did leak details, that's all well and good, but take it from someone who knows... the day the shit hit the fan, Simon was in Christine's ear from the word go... it makes you wonder, was Ashby targetted for investigation because he was dirty, or because Vicpol and/or the state government didn't like the prospect of old school cops becoming chief comissioner?

Did you just "out" Simon Overland???

 

[hoptis]

I was recently going through the public transcripts from the AoSD enquiry and found the transcript that Simon Overland and co presented to the Melbourne hearing. I've copied it out here as it might be of interest to others, his views on pill testing and drug use in relation to the work Vic Police do.

You can find all the transcripts online.

Those present from Vic Pol:

BOORMAN, Inspector Martin Charles, Officer in Charge, Traffic Alcohol Section,
Technical Unit, Victoria Police

O’BRIEN, Detective Inspector James Michael, Victoria Police

OVERLAND, Deputy Commissioner Simon, Victoria Police

QUINN, Ms Catherine, Manager, Drug and Alcohol Branch, Victoria Police Forensic Services Centre

Senator POLLEY—We have heard evidence in the submissions before us today in relation to pill testing. I know in South Australia they have rave parties and they do have some doctors there. We have heard evidence for and against that. I was wondering (a) whether the Victorian police know whether there is any pill testing happening in Victoria and (b) whether or not you have a view?

Senator FERRIS—Do you attend rave parties and in what capacity?

CHAIR—That is not a personal question!

Deputy Commissioner Overland—We do not support pill testing. I guess we understand the
arguments for it. Kate is better qualified to comment on the science of it. Our view is that, unless you do this stuff pretty carefully and you fully understand what is in a pill, you run all sorts of risks in doing it in a half-baked way, if I can put it that way. I think the science is such that you really need to do it pretty rigorously in a controlled way to be very clear about what is in there.

Senator POLLEY—There is also the issue of liability. When you hand a drug back and
something happens—

Deputy Commissioner Overland—That does flow. We do not support it for those reasons.
We understand the arguments for it but we think it is quite dangerous. No, we do not attend rave parties.

Senator FERRIS—I mean the police. Do the police go either in a formal capacity or an
undercover capacity to rave parties? Do they take dogs? If you know one is on, what do you do?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—We do from time to time use drug-detecting dogs. We are not all that keen, to be honest, to go into those situations. We have found from past experience they can be quite volatile and doing that can actually cause more problems than it solve. It does not mean we do not do it but we do it pretty cautiously.

Senator FERRIS—Not in uniform?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—It depends. We certainly have stopped operating in
nightclubs in the belief that, if we could actually find drugs and make arrests, that would enable us to work our way back up the supply line. We have found from experience that that does not really work and that it just creates a whole series of risks. We think there are more effective ways of dealing with the supply side. As I say, we are a little bit cautious about being too present in nightclub environments because there is a whole series of risks not only to our staff but also to the patrons.

Mr WOOD—My background was the Melbourne East police station. One day I had a young
constable come up to me and say, ‘You wouldn’t believe the nightclubs, how out of control they are with drugs,’ because we were not patrolling there. Again, if we tried to send undercover police in there and if they tried to arrest someone, all hell would break loose. Do you have any strategies in place prior to entry so that you have police dogs there? The only reason I say this is that previously you said that in Australia each weekend there are 100,000 people using these tablets. What are the police doing? I know you are doing a hell of a lot, but how can we actually stop people going in there and saying, ‘Hey, if I go in here, I can actually use my drug tonight’?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—We work with owners of licensed premises around this. If we get a sense that it is an issue, we have licensing inspectors who focus particularly on licensed premises and the way they conduct their business. We do work with them around responsible service of liquor. If we become aware that there are drug issues, we try and work with them. We think that is a more effective way of dealing with it—actually putting some of the onus and the responsibility back onto the people who are running the nightclub or the hotel to try and make sure as best they can that it is clean.

Having said that, even they cannot guarantee that. As I say, we do use drug detector dogs; we
do run operations. We tend to run them in the street, though, without actually going into licensed premises. As I say, it is not that easy. If we do run an operation, if we do go into a licensed premises, we are aware that there are some risks around that. The first thing that happens is that all the drugs go on the floor, down the toilet or, worse still, people might be inclined to swallow them. So we do not see that that is necessarily the most effective way to try and deal with that particular problem.

Mr WOOD—Is there anything in the legislation here that is proposed or being reviewed?
Obviously, with the licensed premises, the management has a duty of care and if you have a
person who is intoxicated they are removed. If there is a person under the influence of drugs, I am trying to think about putting more responsibility onto the licensee. I know there are going to be certain places around Melbourne, as there are in other states, where there is a greater use of drug use and the management may be turning a blind eye to it. Is there any legislation which can force a person to take responsibility? Have you heard of any legislation overseas or elsewhere?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—I think licensees now have responsibilities in order to
retain their licence, anyway. There are times when we take licensees to court, or have them taken to court, because we say they are not discharging their responsibilities. That is more often around service of alcohol or control of behaviour. Senator Polley asked the question before about sexual assault, and I did not quite get to that. Drink spiking is an issue, but again we have found it more effective to actually work with licensees. There is a strategy in place. There is an awareness. We try to make people aware of the issue. We try and work with the licensees and their security staff just to keep an eye out for this but also to have people takes basic precautions. Don’t leave drinks unattended—those sorts of things. Clearly, there has been a rise in drink spiking and sadly it is often associated with sexual assault. I am not sure that legislation is necessarily going to provide the answer to those things. I think it is actually much more about using these different sorts of strategies to work with people and try and deal with it in that way.

CHAIR—The statistic you gave right at the beginning which Mr Wood just repeated: was it
100,000 pills or 100,000 people a weekend?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—Our intelligence is saying 100,000 tablets.

CHAIR—Per weekend?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—Per weekend across Australia.

Mr WOOD—What is Victoria’s figure?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—I do not have that figure but if you break it down roughly on population—I am just trying to do the maths; I am not sure.

Mr WOOD—I assume the heavy states are going to be Victoria, New South Wales and
Queensland.

Deputy Commissioner Overland—They would be, but I think there is evidence that these
drugs are freely available right across Australia. They tend to predominate in major urban areas.

Senator POLLEY—I make the point that one of the major concerns for my state is that
heroin usage was really minor in Tasmania, but with these sorts of drugs the usage is increasing to the point where we are actually on the map, which is a real concern. My concern in relation to spiking drinks is the idea of putting your faith in licensees. I was on the licensing board in Tasmania previously. We have had some horrendous cases where it has actually been the licensees who have been the perpetrators. Luckily, they are in jail now, but that is a major concern.

Mr WOOD—That was the point I was raising before. When you have crowd controllers
selling drugs and the management know that—

Deputy Commissioner Overland—But there are measures in place that allow us to deal with that. Clearly, if a licensee is behaving in that way then there are criminal offences, but you can also take their licence off them, under existing arrangements. Similarly, if employees are involved then there are criminal offences. At the end of the day, you do have to rely on people actually complying. I think the laws that are in place are adequate, but you still rely on
compliance.

CHAIR—Kate, it was suggested that you might be able to give us some thoughts or some
evidence on the accuracy of testing that happens around Victoria.

Ms Quinn—Pill testing is now based largely on commercial kits that are available. They are
essentially a colour test kit. You take a scraping from the tablet, drop a couple of drops of liquid onto it and you will get a colour from that. The colour is indicative of a class of drugs or a particular reaction but not a specific drug. For amphetamine type stimulants—the methamphets and amphets—you will get an orange colour; for ecstasy you will get black. But if you have amphetamine and ecstasy together you will just see black, because black will override orange, for example.

There is no component splitting in there, so you have no sense of what is in the tablet other
than that the darkest reaction will be the predominant one. You have no way of assessing the
quantity of material in there. It does not give you a purity test. There will be a lot of people
saying, ‘Oh, yes, it is a faint test, so you’ve got a lower level,’ or ‘It is a strong test, so you’ve
got a higher level.’ That really does not mean anything. The test responds to a certain quantity and it really depends how much you have in that sample, not how much is in that tablet. Because the tablets are not necessarily made to a pharmaceutical grade they are not necessarily homogeneous, so the little scrape may have been from the low side of the tablet et cetera, which is why when we analyse everything is ground and you have these scientific practices.

I guess the big issue is that the techniques that are used in the field do not allow component
splitting or separation of the components within a tablet. When you take it back to a laboratory, that is exactly the type of techniques that we have. We have separation and identification techniques, so we can look at all the components in there that are active drug components. We will get some information about the other components, because there is always something else in there—tablet binding agents and all those sorts of things. None of that you can get from pill testing.

The South Australian model is interesting because they are using a doctor. That is similar to an overseas model. The doctor is not there to talk about the tablet; they are really there to talk about the potential of what might be in the tablet. They are using that as an education system. There are lots of to-and-fros about that, but their pill testing still does not give them any greater analysis in the field. I think what is happening in the South Australian model is that they are taking some of those scrapings back to the laboratory for further information. There is some potential argument for that. Some of the people in the using community say that what is available in rave parties is different to what is on the street. In 20 years I have never seen that to be displayed. You might get a rush of a substance that might be in there, but generally the community eventually displays the same sort of model. So you are unlikely to get one dangerous tablet in that rave and never see that anywhere else in the country.

Mr WOOD—What is a dangerous tablet?

Ms Quinn—That is a very interesting question, because a standard MDMA tablet that
hundreds of people take every weekend could kill one person and not affect the other. To me,
they are all dangerous. They are dangerous substances. A lot of people look at them and say that they are medical substances, so therefore they must be safe. But medicine is always dispersed in a particular usage for a particular problem at a particular quantity, and assessing your health.

CHAIR—What is sometimes said is that all drugs are bad but there could be some scraping in it that will kill you because it is a really shoddy production.

Ms Quinn—That is true, and with respect to some of the substances that we see, PMA is a
very good example of that. PMA is probably most prevalent in South Australia. That seems to be the state that it crops up in every now and then. That substance has a toxicity that is lower, so people are affected at a lower level more quickly. Across the range of designer drugs you have different levels of toxicity; some of them will have a greater effect earlier than will be the case for other substances. But when you make an illicit tablet, you are not, in making it, controlling what that toxicity is. So you might take a tablet with PMA in it today and it is fine, and in the next batch you get, they have gone a little bit too heavy on it and the people who take it will in fact die from that tablet.

CHAIR—And the testing that is done in the rave parties—

Ms Quinn—Won’t differentiate that.

CHAIR—I will follow this up later today but I think someone told us in Brisbane that for
$80,000 you could buy a machine or something that is reasonably accurate. Are you familiar
with that comment?

Ms Quinn—They could be talking about an ion scan. Ion scans are used at airports, for
example. So when you go through the ion scan and someone takes that little swipe off your
suitcase, that is the technique it is using. It is still only an indicative test. The only confirmation test that you can have is a laboratory test, which is run against known standards at that time when everything is prepared in a laboratory concentration. So with a GC/MS, for example, that we would use, that is one component of the test. That piece of equipment costs about $120,000.

But you must then have known standards—known purity, known concentration—otherwise you get a result that means nothing; you just get a peak, and someone says, ‘That’s 10.’ But you have to compare that to the size of a peak of something that you know is 10, otherwise how do you really know what that is?

Mr WOOD—How long would it take to analyse one tablet, to say whether it is so-called
‘safe’?

Ms Quinn—If we were looking at it from the point of view that if I was given a tablet right
now and asked to confirm that—

Mr WOOD—What is safe?

Ms Quinn—That is a very good question.

Mr WOOD—What I am trying to prove is that it will take a heap of time to actually come up
with this analysis.

Ms Quinn—If you gave me a tablet now and I was in my laboratory and you asked me to
determine what was in that, it would take me about half an hour to tell you what components
were in it and then, based on what was in it, I would have to say whether there was one or more components in there. We would then have to set about quantifying that to determine what the quantities are. That might take, if we did nothing else, a couple of hours—so maybe three to four hours to get confirmation.

CHAIR—I do not want to misquote Enlighten—I think they were the people who gave
evidence in Brisbane. Have you had this face-to-face discussion? They, or someone, will tell us that there is a way of doing it that is not perfect but which means that they might save some lives by doing so. Have you had that technical discussion with—

Ms Quinn—We have had a number of conversations and it is probably fair to say that we
have a difference of scientific opinion on that. The quality of evidence that they are looking at would not be suitable for me to send someone to court and possibly to prison. I guess I would say that, if it is not suitable for that, it is not suitable to tell someone it is safe to take and that their life will not be at risk.

CHAIR—You have this difficult moral and legal question for the police force: you are saying you know that at a rave party that is happening down the street there are people in there who are taking drugs and probably there are people there selling drugs. For the right reasons, you do not go in there. Those who support harm reduction say, ‘Look, we also know that but at least we’re going in, and out of tonight’s efforts we might save a life.’ Aren’t they right? If they save two lives that night, aren’t they doing a good job?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—Obviously, if they save two lives, we would think that is
a good outcome. It is an interesting issue, isn’t it, in terms of—

CHAIR—It is very difficult.

Deputy Commissioner Overland—Do they do longer term harm by doing that? Is that then
encouraging other people to think it is safe to become involved? They might save two lives that night but, because of the message they send, 20 other people might decide to use the substance and three of them might die. You just do not know in this area; nothing is ever simple and straightforward. The point we make is that they are illicit substances; it is an offence to use them. We try to police that industry as effectively as we can but it is difficult. The point is that people take enormous risk in using this substance.

CHAIR—I understand all that but you said that 100,000 tablets are taken each weekend and, I suspect, it is increasing and so we are losing the battle—not through any fault of yours or your colleagues elsewhere. I do not know what the solution is.

Mr HAYES—If we are talking about hotels and things like that, your licensing branch is
going to be out there enforcing the various requirements associated with that. If someone is
going to run a venue, whether it be a licensed venue or otherwise, and you know that drugs are being taken there, is there not some obligation to be involved? I was advised that in New South Wales there was a licensed venue and people were going in and it was obvious they were taking ecstasy tablets. The proprietors were not selling bottled water; patrons paid about $5 for a plastic glass of water. This was to save dehydration. Now if that is the sort of thing occurring, shouldn’t some responsibility be enforced on operators of venues?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—We agree, and that is the point I was trying to make: we
do try to work with licensees and operators to make sure they are aware of their responsibilities and meet those.

Mr HAYES—It is the people who run a venue where it is likely that illicit drugs will be
consumed. Are they going to take all the necessary steps to minimise the impact of it or are they going to continue to make a profit out of it?

Deputy Commissioner Overland—We think a lot of them do and we work with them and
find that is a much more effective way of trying to deal with that issue as opposed to sending
police in, which has a myriad of problems. That being said, how many night spots are there?
How many can we physically police? How do you decide? It is much more effective to work
with the licensees and the people in control. A lot of them do work effectively with us. The point is that even if they are attentive, even if they are trying to do the right thing, there is nothing to stop people coming in with drugs that they then sell. Often with all the best will in the world it is not possible to stop that. From our point of view there is a couple of things to consider. One is that the licensees and their staff are not directly involved themselves—if they are that is obviously a problem and then we would take a different approach. The second thing is that they do have reasonable and responsible practices in place so that they actually minimise the potential for those things to happen.

Senator FERRIS—Ms Quinn, you might be able to supply a paper to the committee that
might answer this question more fully. If you do a random sampling of some amphetamines or ecstasy tablets you pick up, how does the inconsistency work? For example, from 20 tablets that you might have tested did three of them have this or four of them have that? It may be that somebody has presented a paper or you have presented a paper on this because I imagine it is quite an interesting exercise. Can you provide us with a paper that demonstrates a sample of tablets and the inconsistencies you talked about?

Ms Quinn—I have done that on a previous occasion; I have probably not updated that data
recently. I am able to look at all the seizures that we have had of tablets by the Victorian police and break those down into major drug components and major other components, so I can update that data and provide you with that.

Senator FERRIS—What I would like to have a look at is, for example, a chemical analysis
that demonstrates the inconsistency and the dangers of some of the inconsistencies in these
tablets. If you could supply that to the committee it would be very helpful.

Ms Quinn—Certainly, it will take me a few days but I will put that together.

CHAIR—Are you saying that five ecstasy tablets will have different components?

Ms Quinn—Let us choose the Mitsubishi logo, for example: you will find that there are a
range of those tablets; you will find a range of colours of those tablets and a range of drug makeups within those tablets. So it is not saying that just because it is that logo it is consistently all the same drug content, if I am getting what you are saying correctly, and I can look through that.

Senator FERRIS—That is exactly what I wanted to try and show. Kids who got a red
something-or-other last week might think, ‘Oh well, if I get a red one this week, it will be the
same as what I got last week or it might have been the same as my friend got half an hour ago.’

Ms Quinn—I can certainly break that down, to give you some idea of what that looks like.

Senator FERRIS—It would be very useful if you are able to do that. Thank you very much.

 

[spok]

I would be prepared to try decriminalisation of some drugs if there was evidence that was the best way to go

Then:

For the people who are making lots of money out of it

There's your evidence right there. Money. And of course making it a clean industry, managing exactly what people are consuming.

Prohibition isn't stopping anyone from doing it, and right or wrong, what right does any one really have to tell someone what they can and can't do to themselves in a democracy anyway?

Drugs aren't like armed robbery or murder where there's an unwilling victim, it's an entirely voluntary choice made by every individual.

There's no doubt about it, drugs, just like alcohol, binge eating, tobacco, prescription medication, gambling etc. can and will do you and others harm under the right circumstances, but if prohibition isn't stopping people from doing it anyway why bother with prohibition? Why not legalise it, generate a huge amount of revenue from the new clean and safer industry and put it towards addressing the reasons why people over do it (any of it) in the first place.

They can keep throwing people in jail for trying to make money in a society where most people are just expecting to settle for relative obscurity or they can address the reasons why people take and sell drugs in the first place.

I think if you really consider that question most people will conclude that it's for the same reasons.

I think common sense just like morality will eventually prevail, it always does just because as communal animals it's in our nature to do the right thing..eventually, but it's a very slow process. This guy isn't entirely there yet but he's a pretty good indication that we are on the way. Maybe another one or two generations.

Him, Rudd, Obama, they've all got a "soft" approach..which is basically what "hard line" deranged little weaklings call reason to overcompensate for their own perceived inadequacy.

It's a frustrating position for any one to be in, thinking ahead of the pack, but at the end of the day our society is only as sensible and well informed as the majority of us, and most people still have a way to go.

Makes you wonder what all the syndicates would do if the drug trade becomes a legitimate industry. Back to the old days of cops and robbers? Or will that be enough motivation for them to take it to the next level and get into cyber crime?

And the cycle continues until we address the reasons why people choose to make money illegally in the first place..

That's my futile internet rant anyway

 

[phase_dancer]

That's my futile internet rant anyway

Not a bad rant at all, welcome to Bluelight.

 

[hoptis]

Overland express
JOHN SILVESTER
September 3, 2009

Yesterday Simon Overland completed his first six months as Victoria's Chief Commissioner. He is quietly rolling out reforms that will change the face of policing.

THE young party-goers in Melbourne's outer east weren't too surprised when the marked police car rolled into the driveway late on a Saturday night. The organisers had sensibly registered the party with the local police and the Narre Warren divisional van had been assigned to make a routine check.

But the revellers were shocked when they saw the face of the man in the leading senior constable's uniform as he stepped from the passenger seat. It was Chief Commissioner Simon Overland on night patrol on that cold June night.

The party boys wanted their pictures taken with the chief and he said if they continued to behave he would be happy to pose with them. He was on patrol after receiving an email from a Narre Warren leading senior constable suggesting senior officers were out of touch with street policing and spent too much time in air-conditioned offices.

Overland accepted the challenge and worked the afternoon shift on the van with the veteran street policeman, swapping his Chief Commissioner's insignia for a senior constable's. He worked as the junior, taking running sheet notes and following instructions from his more experienced partner telling everyone, ''He's the boss''.

The teenager arrested for criminal damage after he kicked a side mirror off a car must have been surprised when he was interviewed and charged by the Chief Commissioner.

It was the perfect picture opportunity - the chief on the road, leading from the front. Yet the media were not invited. It was a private event that impressed many of the cynical local police. ''We were very impressed,'' one policeman from the station said. ''He was down to earth and genuine. You could talk to him and he listened.''

A few weeks later the policeman who sent the email was hospitalised with a heart complaint that required surgery. He was surprised to see one of his visitors at the Monash Medical Centre after surgery was his former patrol partner, Simon Overland.

In early June, Overland turned up unannounced just before midnight in the city where up to 4000 Indians were protesting over violent attacks they believed were racially motivated. He tried to strike a deal, which would have resulted in the group dispersing by 3am. He went home, as did his senior officers, but he returned later and took control, supporting police tactics that broke up the demonstrations.

''There were blows … because arms had been linked and there was a lot of resistance going on. If someone inadvertently got hit in the mouth and got injured, I regret that,'' he said. "In terms of what I saw, the police action was entirely justified and appropriate.''

Traditionally a chief commissioner does not turn up at the front line of demonstrations because he or she may have to oversee any reviews of police tactics or deal with the inevitable complaints. But Overland has shown in his first six months that he intends to do the job his way and is not afraid to ignore protocols.

When he took over on March 2, he stressed that he supported the initiatives of his predecessor, Christine Nixon.

''I think we have the direction right. We have been through a period of change and reform and we will continue to evolve. But I will have my own style and I will be my own person,'' he told The Age.

The suggestion was that it would be a steady-as-she-goes approach at least during his six-month unofficial honeymoon period.

But the reality is that he has overseen a series of big changes and flagged more to come. He said police would have greater access to Taser stun guns, he would soon announce the winning tender to re-arm all operational police with semi-automatic handguns and he has admitted police training in the use of force was inadequate and needed an immediate overhaul.

Overland has redesigned police districts, appointed two new deputies (to sit alongside the unflappable Kieran Walshe) and oversaw the introduction of more flexible police work options. One of those deputies, experienced UK policeman Sir Ken Jones, is reviewing how all criminal investigations are conducted in Victoria. His recommendations are likely to change the way crime is tackled in Victoria.

Overland has also proved to be an effective public and backroom lobbyist, winning Government commitments for extra powers and increased numbers.

One of his first public acts took him perilously close to party politics as he lobbied to have changes to the Police Regulation Act approved in the upper house of State Parliament. In a speech to the Melbourne Press Club he said: ''A key priority into the future will be building on the significant work already undertaken to deal with corruption and ultimately improve the ethical health of the organisation.

''For me, part of those changes relate to the reforms I am seeking to the Police Regulation Act. As I have said in the past, I believe these reforms are vital for me to do my job properly. Victoria Police needs a modern and appropriate employment framework that gives us the same rights as any other employer, in terms of dealing with poor performance or misconduct.

''The Police Regulations Act reforms would strengthen and streamline the dismissal process for misconduct and consistent poor performance - it is an issue I am extremely passionate about.''

He also lobbied for months behind the scenes to persuade the Government to support tougher knife laws. In August, Premier John Brumby said he would introduce new laws that would give police much wider powers to search people for knives.

''We need to nip this problem in the bud,'' Brumby said. ''We've got kids as young as 10 or 11 who have been picked up carrying knives that they intend to use on someone. So we've got to send a message.''

Inside the police force he has introduced or flagged a host of changes, some innovative and some more traditional. He will reintroduce exams for police seeking promotion and will establish fitness tests for operational police.

He promised to provide police with better training to avoid using force in volatile situations. Previous administrations had cut training from four days to two, saving 20,000 operational shifts.

The Office of Police Integrity released a report damning police training but noted Overland was committed to change.

''My approach to the use of force relates to the safety of the public and of our staff,'' he says.

Next year he will introduce a 150-strong flying squad to deal with street violence around the state.

He has repeatedly questioned what he says is a growing booze culture and called on parents to take more responsibility. ''We are not the answer. The public can't opt out of this. This is a community problem. There has been a clear deterioration in public standards,'' he told The Age. ''They are our kids. They take their lead from us. Our role is to set boundaries and maintain them. Alcohol is such a significant factor and we need a change of attitude. Public drunkenness should be seen as unacceptable in the same way as drink driving. If you are drunk in public you should be shunned.''

He has admitted that some of his staff are too quick to take sickies and wants to deal with long-term cases either by finding them worthwhile work on return or to leave with dignity. In the 2007-08 financial year police took an average of 10.5 unscheduled days off each - nearly twice the national average. ''There is a bit of bludging going on,'' he said. ''But I think this reflects the attitudes in the broader community.''

Overland introduced fortnightly online discussions with members and regular web community discussions.

His long-term plans include trying to introduce some order in the force's notoriously inept computer systems, encouraging more police recruits from ethnic minorities, and lifting education standards in police ranks.

There are also minor signs that police command's poisonous relationship with the Police Association may be improving. According to association secretary Greg Davies, ''We have been meeting regularly to discuss issues and we would like to think we are normalising relationships between the two parties.''

Overland has been determined to be as visible as possible, attending as many community and social events as possible. He has done the media rounds, spoken to community groups and tried to connect with ethnic minorities. But after six months on the road he is now likely to pull back and concentrate on core duties.

Last Friday he was at the Police Blue Ribbon Ball, dancing most of the night with his wife, Barbara.

Unlike Christine Nixon, he chose not to sing with the police band. ''A man has to know his limitations,'' he said.

The Age