Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Northern Territory Government, as we know, last week released
its Liquor Act Review, which recommended changes be considered to
make it easier for people to be added to the
Band Drinkers Register and allow the likes of transit safety officers,
security guards and rangers to search people for alcohol and
seize any that they find in public places. But in
that report, the Northern Territory Police raised concerns about this,
(00:23):
saying that it was dangerous and should be left to
highly trained officers. Now joining me in the studio is
the Northern Territory Police Association President Nathan Finn.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Good morning to you.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Good morning Katy, and good morning to listeners.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Now we have spoken a lot about the release of
this review, and it's been suggested that to address public
drinking and the associated anti social behavior, that the Liquor
Act be amended to empower other appointed officers like transit officers,
public housing safety offices, park rangers, council rangers and contracted
security officers were basically to be appointed as a life
(01:00):
inspectors with the authority to search individuals and seize any
unopened container that's believed to contain liquor. Is that really
the job of those kind of officials or would that
land them in dangerous situations?
Speaker 3 (01:14):
O Katie, we might as well spread it to everyone
in the public. Why don't we give everyone police powers
to do everything they want to do, because that's what
they're trying to do unfortunately, and we don't support any
form of second tier policing. We echo the concerns of
obviously the Northern Territory Police Foreign Emergency Service around the
potential safety risk for the people obviously who aren't adequately
trained to engage with the public drinkers or exercise these powers.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Do you reckon they have any kind of role to
play here? I mean, the thing that I worry about
is that you know, if you're tipping someone's alcohol out
and it's cost them quite a bit of money to
get it, that potentially it could wind up a dangerous situation.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
They're going to be frustrated, They're going to be obviously
combative to anyone that's obviously going to do this. But again,
we're at the point where we know there's chronic alcohol
issues in the community. What are we doing for these
chronic alcoholics? Is it a police problem, is it a
security guard problem, is it a health problem. I'd say yes,
and there is a health problem. And what are we
doing in that space? What are we doing for these
(02:09):
chronic drinkers we rehabilitanium or we're just leaving in our
public place in our parks to do what they want
to do.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Well, this is the thing, this too kilometer law. It's
been really contentious in recent months. The government keeps on
saying that it's still in place, but it has been
evident that the police powers in this space are limited.
And then when you read through this review, section one
hundred and seventy one provides that if a person contravenes
the provision, so the person may be searched under section
(02:35):
two hundred and thirty six of the Liquor Act, and
the liquor may be seized and disposed of under that Act.
But there's no other penalty for a contravention of this provision,
which aligns with Recommendations seventy nine of the Royal Commission
into Aboriginal Debts in Custody. So what that says to
me is that police can obviously tip out or seize alcohol,
(02:58):
but that's all they can do.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Is that your understanding, That's.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Exactly our understanding. Coatie. It's been a frustration for our
members out there. We cannot do this. There needs to
be an offense, so we can obviously question them in
relation to the offense, request their name and details, conduct
warrant checks, et cetera. For these members to actually do
something again in the community.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Why is that needed?
Speaker 1 (03:17):
Because I know that again in this report the Northern
Territory Police Foreign Emergency Services of raise concerns it while
they're empowered to conduct searchers of a person four possible contraventions,
they don't have the correlating power to identify the person
that they're searching or seizing alcohol from.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
So if there's an issue with a problem drinker out
in the community, how are we going to refer them
to other agencies if we don't know who their name
and addresses or where we can get in contact with
these people. We need to provide this as a health response,
so it's not a policing response. We should be dealing
this as a health response.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
That's actually like, that's a really good point and one
which I think a lot of people, you know, you
kind of maybe haven't thought or they maybe haven't thought
of that. If you're then trying to deal with these
people longer term. And if you're trying to help people,
how on earth you're going to do it if you
don't even know who they are.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
If we can't record the interactions we're having with these people,
if we're having an interaction with this people three or
four times a day, how do we record that? How
do we refer them to the agencies actually need to
support these people?
Speaker 2 (04:11):
Is I mean, does this need to change?
Speaker 1 (04:13):
I know that the COLP tried to introduce legislation into
parliament last week.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Does this need to change fairly urgently?
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Definitely, It's an easy process to be changed. Again, it's
a recommendation from the review that this is based put
back in the legislation and again the cop have tried
introduced it last week to parliament and again we're found
further information about it where the government saying, oh no,
it's still in place, it's still operating. Well it's not.
It's been watered down. They had a band aid solution
to it.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
I actually found it really fascinating watching question Time last
week when then the government was taking a bit of
a different tact and was saying that the reason that
this was changed is because of the Royal Commission into
Aboriginal Debts in Custody, and it was about decriminalizing people
drinking in public.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
I hadn't heard.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
Them sort of use those words before, and to me,
I thought, well, are we getting this strong? I mean,
are we making criminals the people that are chronic alcoholics?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Definitely that's the possibility as well. Again, if we can't
identify these people, how are we going to refer them
to treatment programs? How are we going to actually deal
with the actual problem. Why don't we just give the
police the power that they need to conduct their duties
and we can refer these people to health organizations that
can actually provide some benefit to them.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Are there other additional powers that the police do need
though to deal with public drinking?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Again, there's lots of powers that obviously we could have.
But again, when we get to that, they're in the
public space, and again they're already out there, they're already
committing these We know that there's chronic alcoholics, then we
know that they're sitting in parks day in, day out. Again,
what are we doing to prevent that? Hey?
Speaker 1 (05:43):
I know that there has also as part of this review,
there's been quite a bit of discussion and a closer
look at whether there needs to be more pathways for
police to add people to the BDR.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
What do you make of that?
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Definitely hasn't gone far enough. We need to obviously increase
the BDR to on premises drinking as well. Again, if
they can't get takeaway alcohol, they're going to go into
a licensed premise where they consume whatever they want like
to consume.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Do you have to show your license?
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Though? I mean I thought that when you kind of
go into licensed premises, like say, I mean, I haven't
got nightclubing for a long long time, but that you
do that, you do have to have to show your
license anyway.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
So is it kind of part of it already?
Speaker 3 (06:20):
No, definitely not on premises obviously, if they believe you're underage,
that's when they only ask you for ID. Again, I
don't think we're any chance of getting asked for ID anytime.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
No, probably not.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Hey, during COVID nineteen, during that health emergency, the director
did introduce special requirements for the sale of al takeaway alcohol,
including the requirement for a person to prove that they've
got a legitimate residence to consume takeaway alcohol. So this
same measure has voluntarily been applied to licenses in perap
and Fanny Bay as part of the Darwin Outer City
(06:52):
Liquor Record.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
At this stage, it doesn't look.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
As though it's being recommended that that measure be legislated
as a condition for takeaway authorities.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
But do you think something like that would make a difference.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
Any further measures that will make a difference, Katie, That's
the thing. We're dealing with problem drinkers that are going
to get access to it no matter what. But if
we can put further things in place to prevent them
from committing obviously drinking in a public place causing disruption
to the community, we all means anything would be work.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
And I guess it goes further than that though, doesn't it,
Because it's not just about sort of drinking in public,
but then what we see is the on flow of
that and unfortunately in some cases you see crime following
on from that public drinking.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
Yeah, definitely, it's something that alcohol or leads to assaults,
leads to domestic violence, instance, leads to sexual assaults at
least to disruption in our community.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Are there parts of this review that you think haven't
gone far enough or that miss the mark or any
areas that you do want to see some further focus.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Well, the Chief Minister always bangs about listening to the experts.
With a Riley Review recommended liqu licensed expectors perform point
of sale intervention duties, not police. The NTP has been
saying for years, obviously that our members want to be
out there proactive policing, but they can't do it. They're
stuck in the front of the bottle shops and doing
license checks.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
So you reckon you want to take You want them
off those bottle shops, those auxiliaries, and you want them
out on the ground.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Definitely, we can convert them to consul positions, have them
out on the front line, assist the front line. We
know that's resource poor at the moment. We've got the
resource allocation review underway again. We know that we're short,
The executives know that we're short, the government know that
we're short. Let's help the police out there on the
front line to do what we need to do and
resource them appropriately.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
I mean, has there been any discussion with the government
about them actually doing that.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
There's been no discussion at all. Caddie. Again, their recommendations
of this review. Obviously the three year review that took
four years to do. Again, we're in twenty twenty three.
The recommendations are there. They've been clear from the start. Again,
if they wanted to do it, they would have done
it by now.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
I want to talk about these retention issues because from
numbers that I've seen from you guys from the Northern
Territory Police Association, there has been one hundred and twelve resignations,
eleven retirements and three dismissals taking that total to one
one hundred and twenty six. That's over basically what the
last financial year, or is that just since January this year?
Speaker 3 (09:10):
That's since January this year, Katie. So again we're seeing
the highest attrition rate across obviously Australia and New Zealand.
In relation to policing. We're still sitting above ten percent
attrition rate. So put it as an example, Katie, is
our police force will turn over its whole police establishment
within ten years. Say that again, So if we continue
(09:30):
at the same attrition rate in ten years time, we'll
have turned over all our police members in our police
force and we'll be starting again.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
And what does that mean in terms of losing experience.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
That's detrimental to policing in the Northern Territory. We cannot
keep losing members at this rate. It's absolutely disgusting. Obviously,
with a course that goes through for six or seven
months through their training, we're averaging twelve officers a month.
By the time we finish training those thirty to forty
officers in the college, we're losing eighty plus.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Finny, why do you reckon they're leaving again.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
They don't feel supported. We've banged on about it for
years and years and years now at the NTPA, they're
not supported by the government. They're not supported by the
legislation they get on the other end of bullshit legislation
that they're making up to put band aid solutions. It's
not working. Give us the power we need to do,
give us the ability and resources to do our job,
(10:21):
and we will do it to the best of our ability.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
And so you reckon.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
That is the main reason why we've got such high
attrition rates in the territory right now, is because our
officers don't feel that they're supported and b do not
feel like they've actually got the legislation to be able
to do their jobs.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
Properly.
Speaker 3 (10:36):
That's correct, that's what they're reporting back to us, Katie.
And again the pressure placed on them to the front line,
they are extremely The crime rate is through the roof.
We all know that they're dealing with this on a
daily basis. They're actually wearing our members down to the
point where they cannot operate. The injuries that they're receiving,
both mentally and physically on the job that they're doing
trying to protect our community is not being seen by
(10:58):
the government.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
I understand as well, Finish that there may have been
another incident out at one of the remote communities where
the police compound was actually broken into.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Again, Yeah, that's correct, Katie, again over the weekend. The
problem was that at the time as well, we've had
security cameras down at the complex as well, so we
found out via social media. So the policemen weren't actually
aware that someone was in the compound that night. They
found out via social media through the community at what.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
I So, what do you mean so people like the
criminals who'd actually broken inat it's seen.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Seen their post on social media. So the CCTV camera
system was down at what I at the time, I
believe it's been rectified now. But again, they didn't know
that someone was in the compound that night. The only
reason they knew about it is because someone posted on
social media to show them highlighting in what I.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
How are those officers feeling upon learning that their security
and safety has been breached?
Speaker 3 (11:51):
Real safe? Again? Over and over again, We've had these conversations.
The members do not feel safe, especially in the remote community, Katie.
Their families are there, they get called out to duty.
They're worried about what's going on and whether they can
obviously continue on working in that community.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So that happened on the weekend. Yes, that's correct, and
there were people inside the compound.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
The police actually did not realize because the security the
CCTV was down, and YU gosh realized because you'd actually.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
Seen the criminals sharing this on social media.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
That's quite mind blowing.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
That's very scary to them. And to think that they
were obviously sleeping at the time within that in close proximity.
Who knows what could have possibly happened.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
What are those officers saying to you? Are they pretty
concerned about their safety right now?
Speaker 3 (12:37):
They are concerned. They feel that they're not being listened
to they feel not being supported.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Have you spoken to the commissioner about this?
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Have I spoke to him on Friday afternoon in relation
to this after it comes through. It was reported to
me again we've had contractors out there to fix the CCTV.
I believe they are out there yesterday rectifying that issue,
and I believe that has been rectified. But again, it's
a serious issue. I'm sorry, Katie, but why would me,
as a police officer take my family to one of
(13:04):
these remote communities and put them in harm's way.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
Well, this is the thing that we have to Yeah,
this is what needs to be sorted. Our police officers
need to be safe to be able to do their jobs.
That's not okay that their safeties and being breached in
terms of being broken into. But the fact then that
it wasn't even known until that vision was actually sheed
on social media is mortifying as well. I mean, I'm
pleased to hear that the Police Commissioner is onto this
(13:29):
and by the sounds of it, has worked quite quickly
to get people out there to fix the cc TV.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
But I mean, it's still a worry.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
It's still a worry for them. It's still happening. CCTV
is not going to stop it. All it's going to
do is identify who the people are coming in. If
these people continue coming in there, I say to the commissioner,
let them worry about themselves, let them police themselves. If
we can't guarantee our officer's safety and the officer's family safety,
why we're even there.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
So do you pull them out?
Speaker 1 (13:55):
Is that what you're suggesting, that those officers be pulled
out of the community.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Of what it may learn for them to have some
respect for what they're doing out there, trying to help
them to maintain their safety and obviously everyone else is
safety in the community as well. Well.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Nathan Finn, we are going to have to leave it there.
I always appreciate your time. Thanks so much for joining
us this morning in this studio.
Speaker 3 (14:14):
No worries, Katy, and obviously thank you to our men
and women in blue that do an amazing job every
single day out there and obviously adverse conditions and we
say thank you for that.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
Absolutely good on you, Finny, Thank you
The Northern Territory Government, as we know, last week released
its Liquor Act Review, which recommended changes be considered to
make it easier for people to be added to the
Band Drinkers Register and allow the likes of transit safety officers,
security guards and rangers to search people for alcohol and
seize any that they find in public places. But in
that report, the Northern Territory Police raised concerns about this,
(00:23):
saying that it was dangerous and should be left to
highly trained officers. Now joining me in the studio is
the Northern Territory Police Association President Nathan Finn.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Good morning to you.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Good morning Katy, and good morning to listeners.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Now we have spoken a lot about the release of
this review, and it's been suggested that to address public
drinking and the associated anti social behavior, that the Liquor
Act be amended to empower other appointed officers like transit officers,
public housing safety offices, park rangers, council rangers and contracted
security officers were basically to be appointed as a life
(01:00):
inspectors with the authority to search individuals and seize any
unopened container that's believed to contain liquor. Is that really
the job of those kind of officials or would that
land them in dangerous situations?
Speaker 3 (01:14):
O Katie, we might as well spread it to everyone
in the public. Why don't we give everyone police powers
to do everything they want to do, because that's what
they're trying to do unfortunately, and we don't support any
form of second tier policing. We echo the concerns of
obviously the Northern Territory Police Foreign Emergency Service around the
potential safety risk for the people obviously who aren't adequately
trained to engage with the public drinkers or exercise these powers.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Do you reckon they have any kind of role to
play here? I mean, the thing that I worry about
is that you know, if you're tipping someone's alcohol out
and it's cost them quite a bit of money to
get it, that potentially it could wind up a dangerous situation.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
They're going to be frustrated, They're going to be obviously
combative to anyone that's obviously going to do this. But again,
we're at the point where we know there's chronic alcohol
issues in the community. What are we doing for these
chronic alcoholics? Is it a police problem, is it a
security guard problem, is it a health problem. I'd say yes,
and there is a health problem. And what are we
doing in that space? What are we doing for these
(02:09):
chronic drinkers we rehabilitanium or we're just leaving in our
public place in our parks to do what they want
to do.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Well, this is the thing, this too kilometer law. It's
been really contentious in recent months. The government keeps on
saying that it's still in place, but it has been
evident that the police powers in this space are limited.
And then when you read through this review, section one
hundred and seventy one provides that if a person contravenes
the provision, so the person may be searched under section
(02:35):
two hundred and thirty six of the Liquor Act, and
the liquor may be seized and disposed of under that Act.
But there's no other penalty for a contravention of this provision,
which aligns with Recommendations seventy nine of the Royal Commission
into Aboriginal Debts in Custody. So what that says to
me is that police can obviously tip out or seize alcohol,
(02:58):
but that's all they can do.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Is that your understanding, That's.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Exactly our understanding. Coatie. It's been a frustration for our
members out there. We cannot do this. There needs to
be an offense, so we can obviously question them in
relation to the offense, request their name and details, conduct
warrant checks, et cetera. For these members to actually do
something again in the community.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Why is that needed?
Speaker 1 (03:17):
Because I know that again in this report the Northern
Territory Police Foreign Emergency Services of raise concerns it while
they're empowered to conduct searchers of a person four possible contraventions,
they don't have the correlating power to identify the person
that they're searching or seizing alcohol from.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
So if there's an issue with a problem drinker out
in the community, how are we going to refer them
to other agencies if we don't know who their name
and addresses or where we can get in contact with
these people. We need to provide this as a health response,
so it's not a policing response. We should be dealing
this as a health response.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
That's actually like, that's a really good point and one
which I think a lot of people, you know, you
kind of maybe haven't thought or they maybe haven't thought
of that. If you're then trying to deal with these
people longer term. And if you're trying to help people,
how on earth you're going to do it if you
don't even know who they are.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
If we can't record the interactions we're having with these people,
if we're having an interaction with this people three or
four times a day, how do we record that? How
do we refer them to the agencies actually need to
support these people?
Speaker 2 (04:11):
Is I mean, does this need to change?
Speaker 1 (04:13):
I know that the COLP tried to introduce legislation into
parliament last week.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Does this need to change fairly urgently?
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Definitely, It's an easy process to be changed. Again, it's
a recommendation from the review that this is based put
back in the legislation and again the cop have tried
introduced it last week to parliament and again we're found
further information about it where the government saying, oh no,
it's still in place, it's still operating. Well it's not.
It's been watered down. They had a band aid solution
to it.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
I actually found it really fascinating watching question Time last
week when then the government was taking a bit of
a different tact and was saying that the reason that
this was changed is because of the Royal Commission into
Aboriginal Debts in Custody, and it was about decriminalizing people
drinking in public.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
I hadn't heard.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
Them sort of use those words before, and to me,
I thought, well, are we getting this strong? I mean,
are we making criminals the people that are chronic alcoholics?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Definitely that's the possibility as well. Again, if we can't
identify these people, how are we going to refer them
to treatment programs? How are we going to actually deal
with the actual problem. Why don't we just give the
police the power that they need to conduct their duties
and we can refer these people to health organizations that
can actually provide some benefit to them.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Are there other additional powers that the police do need
though to deal with public drinking?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Again, there's lots of powers that obviously we could have.
But again, when we get to that, they're in the
public space, and again they're already out there, they're already
committing these We know that there's chronic alcoholics, then we
know that they're sitting in parks day in, day out. Again,
what are we doing to prevent that? Hey?
Speaker 1 (05:43):
I know that there has also as part of this review,
there's been quite a bit of discussion and a closer
look at whether there needs to be more pathways for
police to add people to the BDR.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
What do you make of that?
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Definitely hasn't gone far enough. We need to obviously increase
the BDR to on premises drinking as well. Again, if
they can't get takeaway alcohol, they're going to go into
a licensed premise where they consume whatever they want like
to consume.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Do you have to show your license?
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Though? I mean I thought that when you kind of
go into licensed premises, like say, I mean, I haven't
got nightclubing for a long long time, but that you
do that, you do have to have to show your
license anyway.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
So is it kind of part of it already?
Speaker 3 (06:20):
No, definitely not on premises obviously, if they believe you're underage,
that's when they only ask you for ID. Again, I
don't think we're any chance of getting asked for ID anytime.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
No, probably not.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Hey, during COVID nineteen, during that health emergency, the director
did introduce special requirements for the sale of al takeaway alcohol,
including the requirement for a person to prove that they've
got a legitimate residence to consume takeaway alcohol. So this
same measure has voluntarily been applied to licenses in perap
and Fanny Bay as part of the Darwin Outer City
(06:52):
Liquor Record.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
At this stage, it doesn't look.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
As though it's being recommended that that measure be legislated
as a condition for takeaway authorities.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
But do you think something like that would make a difference.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
Any further measures that will make a difference, Katie, That's
the thing. We're dealing with problem drinkers that are going
to get access to it no matter what. But if
we can put further things in place to prevent them
from committing obviously drinking in a public place causing disruption
to the community, we all means anything would be work.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
And I guess it goes further than that though, doesn't it,
Because it's not just about sort of drinking in public,
but then what we see is the on flow of
that and unfortunately in some cases you see crime following
on from that public drinking.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
Yeah, definitely, it's something that alcohol or leads to assaults,
leads to domestic violence, instance, leads to sexual assaults at
least to disruption in our community.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
Are there parts of this review that you think haven't
gone far enough or that miss the mark or any
areas that you do want to see some further focus.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Well, the Chief Minister always bangs about listening to the experts.
With a Riley Review recommended liqu licensed expectors perform point
of sale intervention duties, not police. The NTP has been
saying for years, obviously that our members want to be
out there proactive policing, but they can't do it. They're
stuck in the front of the bottle shops and doing
license checks.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
So you reckon you want to take You want them
off those bottle shops, those auxiliaries, and you want them
out on the ground.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
Definitely, we can convert them to consul positions, have them
out on the front line, assist the front line. We
know that's resource poor at the moment. We've got the
resource allocation review underway again. We know that we're short,
The executives know that we're short, the government know that
we're short. Let's help the police out there on the
front line to do what we need to do and
resource them appropriately.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
I mean, has there been any discussion with the government
about them actually doing that.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
There's been no discussion at all. Caddie. Again, their recommendations
of this review. Obviously the three year review that took
four years to do. Again, we're in twenty twenty three.
The recommendations are there. They've been clear from the start. Again,
if they wanted to do it, they would have done
it by now.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
I want to talk about these retention issues because from
numbers that I've seen from you guys from the Northern
Territory Police Association, there has been one hundred and twelve resignations,
eleven retirements and three dismissals taking that total to one
one hundred and twenty six. That's over basically what the
last financial year, or is that just since January this year?
Speaker 3 (09:10):
That's since January this year, Katie. So again we're seeing
the highest attrition rate across obviously Australia and New Zealand.
In relation to policing. We're still sitting above ten percent
attrition rate. So put it as an example, Katie, is
our police force will turn over its whole police establishment
within ten years. Say that again, So if we continue
(09:30):
at the same attrition rate in ten years time, we'll
have turned over all our police members in our police
force and we'll be starting again.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
And what does that mean in terms of losing experience.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
That's detrimental to policing in the Northern Territory. We cannot
keep losing members at this rate. It's absolutely disgusting. Obviously,
with a course that goes through for six or seven
months through their training, we're averaging twelve officers a month.
By the time we finish training those thirty to forty
officers in the college, we're losing eighty plus.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Finny, why do you reckon they're leaving again.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
They don't feel supported. We've banged on about it for
years and years and years now at the NTPA, they're
not supported by the government. They're not supported by the
legislation they get on the other end of bullshit legislation
that they're making up to put band aid solutions. It's
not working. Give us the power we need to do,
give us the ability and resources to do our job,
(10:21):
and we will do it to the best of our ability.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
And so you reckon.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
That is the main reason why we've got such high
attrition rates in the territory right now, is because our
officers don't feel that they're supported and b do not
feel like they've actually got the legislation to be able
to do their jobs.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
Properly.
Speaker 3 (10:36):
That's correct, that's what they're reporting back to us, Katie.
And again the pressure placed on them to the front line,
they are extremely The crime rate is through the roof.
We all know that they're dealing with this on a
daily basis. They're actually wearing our members down to the
point where they cannot operate. The injuries that they're receiving,
both mentally and physically on the job that they're doing
trying to protect our community is not being seen by
(10:58):
the government.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
I understand as well, Finish that there may have been
another incident out at one of the remote communities where
the police compound was actually broken into.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Again, Yeah, that's correct, Katie, again over the weekend. The
problem was that at the time as well, we've had
security cameras down at the complex as well, so we
found out via social media. So the policemen weren't actually
aware that someone was in the compound that night. They
found out via social media through the community at what.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
I So, what do you mean so people like the
criminals who'd actually broken inat it's seen.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Seen their post on social media. So the CCTV camera
system was down at what I at the time, I
believe it's been rectified now. But again, they didn't know
that someone was in the compound that night. The only
reason they knew about it is because someone posted on
social media to show them highlighting in what I.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
How are those officers feeling upon learning that their security
and safety has been breached?
Speaker 3 (11:51):
Real safe? Again? Over and over again, We've had these conversations.
The members do not feel safe, especially in the remote community, Katie.
Their families are there, they get called out to duty.
They're worried about what's going on and whether they can
obviously continue on working in that community.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So that happened on the weekend. Yes, that's correct, and
there were people inside the compound.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
The police actually did not realize because the security the
CCTV was down, and YU gosh realized because you'd actually.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
Seen the criminals sharing this on social media.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
That's quite mind blowing.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
That's very scary to them. And to think that they
were obviously sleeping at the time within that in close proximity.
Who knows what could have possibly happened.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
What are those officers saying to you? Are they pretty
concerned about their safety right now?
Speaker 3 (12:37):
They are concerned. They feel that they're not being listened
to they feel not being supported.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Have you spoken to the commissioner about this?
Speaker 3 (12:44):
Have I spoke to him on Friday afternoon in relation
to this after it comes through. It was reported to
me again we've had contractors out there to fix the CCTV.
I believe they are out there yesterday rectifying that issue,
and I believe that has been rectified. But again, it's
a serious issue. I'm sorry, Katie, but why would me,
as a police officer take my family to one of
(13:04):
these remote communities and put them in harm's way.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
Well, this is the thing that we have to Yeah,
this is what needs to be sorted. Our police officers
need to be safe to be able to do their jobs.
That's not okay that their safeties and being breached in
terms of being broken into. But the fact then that
it wasn't even known until that vision was actually sheed
on social media is mortifying as well. I mean, I'm
pleased to hear that the Police Commissioner is onto this
(13:29):
and by the sounds of it, has worked quite quickly
to get people out there to fix the cc TV.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
But I mean, it's still a worry.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
It's still a worry for them. It's still happening. CCTV
is not going to stop it. All it's going to
do is identify who the people are coming in. If
these people continue coming in there, I say to the commissioner,
let them worry about themselves, let them police themselves. If
we can't guarantee our officer's safety and the officer's family safety,
why we're even there.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
So do you pull them out?
Speaker 1 (13:55):
Is that what you're suggesting, that those officers be pulled
out of the community.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Of what it may learn for them to have some
respect for what they're doing out there, trying to help
them to maintain their safety and obviously everyone else is
safety in the community as well. Well.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Nathan Finn, we are going to have to leave it there.
I always appreciate your time. Thanks so much for joining
us this morning in this studio.
Speaker 3 (14:14):
No worries, Katy, and obviously thank you to our men
and women in blue that do an amazing job every
single day out there and obviously adverse conditions and we
say thank you for that.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
Absolutely good on you, Finny, Thank you
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.