New Zealand Security - April-May 2019

April/May 2019

Countering terrorism where there used to be no terrorism to counter Organisational culture as a precipitator to crime

Can the security industry be trusted?

SSC Report and Surveillance: Big brother looking out for you?

www.defsec.net.nz

on

e c u r i ty I

ar

Z

S ’s

mited 30 y Li e

nd

Loktr

ic

y tr s u

ss

ervicing

N

Loktronic for Quality and Value backed by Guarantees

Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK mail@loktronic.co.nz www.loktronic.co.nz

AIRPORT

Panomera W8 Model W8 Topline 75/360

75MP Resolution!

75 MP

75 MP

e

Ø 179 m >

Ø 72 m

25 px/m

>

Detection Distance

e

30

62 px/m

Observation Distance

360° FoV

FPS

ICR Day-Night

Motor Lens

P-Iris

UWDR

EdgeStorage

Multiuser

Weatherproof

The Panomera® W8 360° Multifocal Sensor System has been developed with special focus on the surveillance of large spaces from a single location. The innovative lens and sensor concept of the Panomera® in combination with a high-resolution fisheye lens allows for the unique recording of a complete half-space (half sphere) without blind spots, thus 360° horizontally and 90° vertically. A total effective resolution of 75MP. The W8 is the perfect solution for a variety of locations. When combined with Dallmeier Semsy technology and detection tracking. It is an effective solution for detection and tracking of individuals over a large area who pose a security risk.

• Perfection solution for Airports, Logistics, Supermarkets, Malls.

• Provides Long-term investment protection.

Distributed by :

3 Hotunui Drive, Mt. Wellington, Auckland, New Zealand P.O. Box 14-058, Panmure, Auckland 1741, New Zealand T. +64 9 276 3271F. +64 9 276 9645 | E. sales@crknz.co.nz | Website : www.crkennedy.co.nz

CONTENTS

ISSN Print 1175-2149 ISSN Online 2537-8937

CHRISTCHURCH

18

20

32

42

year 10 guarantee ENJOY a

*

on Loktronic Indoor Electromagnetic Locks!

Industry Associations

www.security.org.nz

www. asis.org.nz

www.masterlocksmiths.com.au

www.nzipi.org.nz

www.security-institute.org.nz

0800 367 565

20851

4

*Standard terms & conditions of sale apply.

From the Editor.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Panasonic offers full local service & support........................................................................................................................................................................8 Pelco to present broad range of solutions at ISC West 2019.................................................................................................................................... 10 Sweeping legislative changes come into effect.............................................................................................................................................................. 12 NZSA CEO Update........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Beating traffic jams with intelligent video technology................................................................................................................................................ 16 New Zealand’s VST partners with Digifort.......................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Can the security industry be trusted?................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Organisational culture as a precipitator to crime............................................................................................................................................................ 22 SSC Report and Surveillance: Big brother looking out for you?.............................................................................................................................. 26 Air Borders – Protected but porous....................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 Hills appoints new GM for New Zealand business......................................................................................................................................................... 31 Countering terrorism where there used to be no terrorism to counter............................................................................................................. 32 Interview: Countering violent extremism on the front foot......................................................................................................................................34 Interview: Call out extremist behaviour, define underpinning values................................................................................................................. 36 Terrorism: Less lethal, more universal.................................................................................................................................................................................... 38 The benefits of being smart....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Showcase..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................44 Events.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................46

www.loktronic.co.nz

NZSM

www.skills.org.nz

April/May 2019

NZSM New Zealand Security Magazine

Nick Dynon Managing Editor Nick has written for NZSM since 2013.

He writes on all things security, but is particularly fascinated with the fault lines between security and privacy, and between individual, enterprise and national security.

Prior to NZSM he clocked up over 20 years experience in various border security and military roles.

Contact Details: Nick Dynon, Managing Editor Phone: + 64 (0) 22 366 3691 Email: nick@defsec.net.nz Craig Flint, Publisher Phone: + 64 7 868 2703 Email: craig@defsec.net.nz Postal and delivery address: 27 West Crescent, Te Puru 3575, Thames, RD5, New Zealand

6

NZSM

From the Editor Welcome to the April - May 2019 issue of New Zealand Security Magazine.

On 15 March, New Zealand came face-to-face with an evil it had hitherto only seen from afar. Families, communities and the nation are privately and collectively grieving while trying to make some sense of what happened and what the future now holds.

In this issue of NZSM, providing their thoughts in relation to the Christchurch mosque attacks are Dr John Battersby, Dr Richard Shortt and John Borland specialists in terrorism, national security and intelligence, and counter terror policing respectively. With a post-attack spotlight being shone on aviation security, Philip Wood MBE, Head of the School of Aviation and Security at Buckinghamshire New University, reinforces the role of the human in an otherwise technology-driven area.

The incident has also highlighted the global rise in far-right extremist terrorism, which is a trend Lilly Chapa documents in her review of the latest Global Terrorism Index. Far-right groups and individuals, she writes, accounted for nearly 60 percent of extremist-related deaths in the U.S. in 2017.

Adding to his feature article in February’s NZSM, David Horsburgh PSP PCI CPP returns with a damning assessment of customer service culture within the Ministry of Social Development, writing that an organisational culture that treats customers without respect is a recipe for violence against staff. It’s something, he argues, that post-Ashburton review of the MSD security environment have failed to consider.

In the previous issue of NZSM, David wrote that the 2018 report of the State Services Commission Inquiry into the use of external security consultants by government agencies had raised the need for debate of our industry’s legal and ethical use of intrusive surveillance techniques. In this issue, James Knapp provides a contrasting perspective, arguing that the SSC findings present significant – and seemingly unreasonable – barriers to agencies’ monitoring and assessment of threats.

With minimum wage increases and other cost factors putting pressure on already very tight margins within the industry, it’s timely that Jane Arnott, Institute for Business Ethics’ New Zealand Representative, identifies areas of ethical concern in the industry. According to Jane, we should be taking pause to consider the same types of ethical questions around incentives and commissions that have recently embroiled Australia’s banking industry.

There’s plenty more news inside, with a useful legislative update from NZSA CEO Gary Morrison, an exploration of smart city trends by Ginger Schlueter, traffic management solutions from Hikvision, news from Panasonic, Pelco and Hills, an update from VST about their new partnership with Digifort, and much, much more.

I hope to see as many of you as possible at the upcoming Women in Security on 3rd May at Te Papa Tongarewa in Wellington, which is being hosted by the ASIS New Zealand Chapter. This is a must-attend security sector event where key note speakers, Bonnie Butlin and Grant Lecky will be joined by leaders from the New Zealand Cyber, Defence and Government sectors. Principal sponsor is Optic Security Group, and there are still some great sponsorship opportunities available.

Visit www.asis.org.nz or contact secretary@asis.org.nz.

Also, make sure you’ve marked the NZSA Security Industry Awards Dinner on Friday 23 August into your diaries. For more information go to www.defsec.net.nz Nick Dynon, Auckland facebook.com/defsecmedia twitter.com/DefsecNZ linkedin.com/company/ defsec-media-limited Upcoming Issue June / July 19 Wholesalers and Manufacturers Perimeter Protection, Alarms, CCTV

Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is given in good faith and has been derived from sources believed to be reliable and accurate.

However, neither the publishers nor any person involved in the preparation of this publication accept any form of liability whatsoever for its contents including advertisements, editorials, opinions, advice or information or for any consequences from its use.

Copyright: No article or part thereof may be reproduced without prior consent of the publisher.

April/May 2019

T H E N ZS A SE CURITY I N DU STRY AWARDS 2 3 A U GU ST 2 0 1 9

Recognising and celebrating excellence and outstanding service and performance in the New Zealand Security Industry.

The awards are an opportunity for the security industry to recognise and promote excellence and outstanding service performance among New Zealand security companies, so make sure to get your nominations in before they close on the 12th July 2019.

For more information on how to nominate someone go to the events page of our website www.security.org.nz

Winners will be announced at the NZSA Security Awards Dinner on Friday 23 August 2019 at Crowne Plaza, Auckland.

Register via the website by clicking on “Events�.

Registration and Nominations are open to all who work or have interest in the security industry, not just NZSA members.

All enquiries regarding the Awards Dinner should be directed to the NZSA office on (09) 486 0441 or email nzsa@security.org.nz

NEW ZEALAND SECURITY ASSOCIATION

CONTROL. SAFETY. CONVENIENCE. Flexible configurations that work for you, whatever your needs. Commercial and residential solutions with outstanding scalability ensure that no project is too big or small. Panasonic Video Intercom products are made to last and use the latest technology to enable a suite of smart features.

Distributed by

www.panasonic.com/nz

Ph: 0800 144 557 Web: www.hills.co.nz

Ph: 0800 295 695 Web: www.awlnz.co.nz

Panasonic offers full local service & support

Unlike other brands who rely on distribution centres, Panasonic is an in-house operation from start to finish. With a warehouse here in New Zealand, a dedicated call centre and a service team in the same building, Panasonic is on hand to support their customers every step of the way.

There are now over 110 employees across all departments and segments Loved by New Zealand households and businesses for almost a century, Panasonic’s diverse range of products, systems, and services are designed to of the business, working together as one to serve New Zealand and benefit the lives of New Zealanders. continue the mission of creating “A Better Life, A Better World”.

We understand how products can impact people’s lives and this drives us to develop technology which is “clever made easy” and ensuring that your everyday life - at home, work, or on-the-go - is the best it can be.

Video Intercom Systems are a key area of investment for Panasonic NZ in the coming years and customers will benefit from the additional resources being allocated to this category.

Every year brings new demands and encourages market-leading product innovation, but the core values of Panasonic always remain the same.

Reliability and trust are what Panasonic is all about and those are the kinds of qualities that people can always count on.

With a new Business Development Manager, Heath Coleman, and additional support staff, there are always dedicated Panasonic team members on hand to assist with queries and issues that crop up.

Panasonic New Zealand has grown from a small subsidiary of Fisher & Paykel in 1972 to a large and independent brand, trusted and well known across the country. With offices in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, Panasonic New Zealand is well placed to provide all aspects of consumer and business services, and cater to the needs of its customers.

The Panasonic New Zealand Headquarters are located in an energy efficient building in Auckland which centralises business systems, accommodates for the increased demand in warehouse space, and supports logistical operations.

Panasonic remains a market leader in residential intercom and also holds an extensive range of Analogue and full IP systems designed for small to large scale apartments and enterprise solutions. ‘Reliability’ and ‘userfriendly’ are key principles in all Panasonic systems while remaining a cost effective and competitive solution.

Panasonic’s quality VIdeo Intercom Systems speak for themselves, but it is the full local support service that puts the icing on the cake. Make life easier for your business by reaching out to your local distributor or Heath today to find out how Panasonic can become part of your business.

Founded in 1918 by Konosuke Matsushita, Panasonic is a company built on Japanese principles of quality and reliability. Today, Panasonic consumer electronics are offered through 172 locations in 37 countries and territories. We continue to work by the values established by Konosuke Matsushita a century ago while continuing to develop the products of the future.

Panasonic Contact: Heath Coleman Panasonic Business Development Manager heath.coleman@nz.panasonic.com 021 868 717

SHOWCASE

Pelco to present broad range of solutions at ISC West 2019 Pelco™ by Schneider Electric, the global provider of end-to-end video security solutions, will be exhibiting products, solutions, and services at ISC West 2019 in Las Vegas between April 10 and 12.

The 2019 edition of the iconic event will see Pelco showcasing its VideoXpert™ Video Management System (VMS) platform enhancements, the GFC Professional 4K camera, and the recentlylaunched Spectra Professional 4K camera. Pelco will also be previewing other products and services that will be available in the next few months.

VideoXpert is architected for the most-demanding customers where system uptime (availability) is key for missioncritical deployments. “VideoXpert VMS functionality continues to evolve at a rapid pace, delivering what customers care most about: intuitive features, mission-critical availability, and responsiveness as well as providing day-to-day secure and trusted system operation that can scale with them as their deployments grow,” said Todd Dunning, Pelco’s Senior Product Line Manager.

When combined with the new VxCare Professional Services offering, a bundled three-tier service plan for VideoXpert Professional and Enterprise systems, customers stand to benefit from optimised performance and system availability of their video management system backed by a high level of support for both integrators and end users.

Pelco, a Schneider Electric company, is a world leader in the design,

GFC Pro 4K Bullet

10

NZSM

development and delivery of video security solutions and services deployed in several markets. These solutions incorporate Pelco cameras and Pelco software for video management and integration with other data-driven applications.

Pelco sees the use of video and predictive capabilities as key to improving the well-being of people through enhanced protection and automation in urban and enterprise environments. Its solutions feature technologies such as Cloud Services, Automatic License Plate Recognition, 4K imaging capability, and advanced deep learning-based analytics.

Pelco VMS and cameras are deployed across a wide range of vertical market applications, and trusted by some of the most demanding customers in the world. Pelco will be showcasing multiple deployment examples at ISC West, including healthcare, city surveillance, commercial/retail, education, and others.

This includes the GFC Professional 4K video camera, released last November, which delivers 8 MP resolution detail for demanding video security applications with heavy foot and vehicular traffic.

In comparative tests using the ISO standard for evaluating a camera’s true dynamic range (tone contrast within an image) – and not a proprietary vendor test with undisclosed “forensic” conditions – the GFC Professional 4K consistently tested 5 to 9 percent higher than the competitor’s 4K camera.

Additionally, the GFC Professional 4K delivers category-leading 0.2 lux light sensitivity performance at 30FPS in colour mode.

GFC Pro 4K Dome

In addition to the GFC and Spectra Professional 4K cameras, many other Pelco products and services will be on display at the event. Among them are the upcoming GFC Professional Multi (multi-directional IP camera), the Evolution camera series (ultra-wide-angle panoramic monitoring), the Spectra Enhanced and the award-winning Esprit Enhanced cameras, the Optera 270 camera (seamless panoramic view), and the High Security Corner Mount IBD camera, to name a few.

Pelco’s Director of Segment Marketing, Stuart Rawling, will present “Gearing Up for an Automated Revolution”, which will cover how the security business will be impacted by the current technology revolution. Pelco’s hands-on, real-time product demos will take place at Booth #20031.

More information about Pelco and how its solutions seek to address today’s security and surveillance challenges, visit www.securityinsights.pelco.com, or follow Pelco on Twitter (@PelcoVideo).

April/May 2019

Your Preferred Pelco Distributor

www.sektor.co.nz | 0800 735 867 | security@sektor.co.nz

GFC PRO 4K

Clarity With Purpose

INDUSTRY

Sweeping legislative changes come into effect New Zealand Security Association CEO Gary Morrison outlines a number of legislative changes that stand to significantly impact providers of security services.

Over the next few months businesses will be faced with a number of workplace reforms that will have considerable impact, particularly for the providers of manpower services. Given their significance, I do encourage our members to obtain specialist advice, particularly around the drafting of employment agreements.

Whilst I have provided a brief summary and commentary on these changes in my monthly report, the NZSA has worked with Jaime Rose-Peacock from Marbles Business Solutions, a specialist in the field of Human Resources and Employment Relations, to provide a more in-depth analysis of the changes.

The report from Jaime will be forwarded to members only under separate cover.

Gary Morrison, New Zealand Security Association CEO

12

NZSM

There is also longer-term uncertainty from a business perspective with the potential for an industry-wide Fair Pay Agreement (security and bus drivers are rumoured to be the first industries to be covered by FPAs), the proposed reform of the Vocational Education sector that will see the merging of all polytechnics and ITOs, and Capital Gains Taxes for the sale of privately-owned businesses.

Increase to Minimum Wage The minimum wage will increase to $17.70 an hour on 1st April, an increase of $1.20 per hour. This will obviously have a significant impact on those operating within the guarding sector but will also have wider ramifications as employees seek to maintain pay parity.

Most providers have been proactive in approaching customers on this issue, and there has been a general acceptance on the need to pass on the immediate cost increase. The challenge, however, is in gaining customer awareness and acceptance of the ‘pay parity’ flow-on effect of those staff not directly affected by the minimum wage increase but who still will require an increase in their pay rates.

We recommend adopting an open book disclosure policy, and reassure customers that necessary increases relate directly to increased costs rather than a movement in margins.

Domestic Violence Victims Protection Act 2018 This Act, which comes into effect on 1st April, provides any victim of abuse (physical, sexual or psychological) with the right to access 10 days paid domestic leave (in each 12-month period), the right to request temporary flexible working arrangements (for up to two months) and the ability for the employee to raise

a personal grievance if treated adversely.

The Act also covers people who are the victims of historic abuse and are still suffering.

Leave is not pro-rated – like sick leave, all staff can claim a full 10 days within a year including part-time or casual employees, however, it cannot be accrued if not used within the year. Employees can also claim this entitlement if they have dependents living with them (17 years or under) who are affected by domestic violence.

The law provides that the employer can request proof, before granting the leave and flexible working. However, if the employer doesn’t get suitable proof, they can’t deny the leave altogether.

The employer would have to allow the leave being taken (either unpaid, or via other types of leave) and would still need to consider the flexible working arrangements under the current flexible working laws.

Licensing for Monitoring Operators In our last newsletter we advised that an amendment to the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators (Minimum Training) Regulations 2018 would come into effect on 1st April 2019, and we understand that this is still on track.

The change will confirm that Monitoring Operators are required to be licensed under the Property Guard classification in the Act, but will provide them with an exemption from the Minimum Training Unit requirements.

Associated changes will be made to the Certificate of Approval application and renewal process to ensure that Property Guard applicants are identified as either frontline (Security Officers) or non-frontline (Control Room or Monitoring Centre Operators).

April/May 2019

Employment Relations Ammend. Act Some minor changes occurred when the Bill was introduced in December 2018, however, the majority of changes will come into effect on 6th May. The key changes for businesses who operate under IEAs, and not collectives, are: • 90 Day trial periods will be limited to businesses with less than 20 employees • Prescribed meal and rest breaks are being reinstated • Employees in specified ‘vulnerable industries’ will be able to transfer on their current terms and conditions in their employment agreement if their work is restructured • Employers will need to provide new employees with an approved Active Choice form • Employers will need to allow for reasonable paid time for union delegates • Employers will need to pass on information about the role and function of unions.

Removal of 90 Day Trial Period From 6th May, businesses employing 20 or more staff will not be able to include a 90-day trial clause in their employment agreements.

It should be noted, however, that businesses with staff being employed between now and the 6th May can still use the 90-day trial period as long as the employment agreements are offered and signed before the 6th May, in which case the trial period can still run for the full 90 days and be in effect.

Despite removal of the 90-day trial period, any business (including those with less than 20 staff ) can use

April/May 2019

a Probationary Period clause to enable assessment of an employee’s skills against the role responsibilities.

Rest and meal breaks The Act reinstates the right of employees to have set rest and meal breaks. The benefit of rest and meal breaks is that by operating safely, workplaces help to ensure their staff’s wellbeing. Employers must pay for minimum rest breaks but do not have to pay for minimum meal breaks.

How long, and how often the breaks are, will be dependent on the hours worked. There are no set rules on how long the breaks are or when they can be taken, but they must be a suitable length and at a suitable time during their work.

Where employers and employees can’t agree on when to take the breaks, the law will require the breaks to be in the middle of the work period, so long as it is reasonable and practical to do so.

All employers must allow employees to take paid rest breaks and unpaid meal breaks unless there is a very good reason for any restrictions. Restrictions must be reasonable and necessary, or reasonable and agreed to by the employee.

If breaks cannot be provided by the employer, the employee must be offered reasonable compensation. Employers cannot just pay employees not to take breaks – there has to be a very good reason, e.g. security personnel who can’t leave their post.

Govt procurement rules 4th edition The Labour-led coalition government has stated that government procurement should be used to support wider social, economic and environmental

outcomes that go beyond the immediate purchase of goods and services, and has encapsulated this within a draft 4th edition to the Government Procurement Rules that is currently under consultation.

The proposed rules introduce four priority outcomes: 1. Access for NZ business 2. Construction sector skills and training 3. Employment standards 4. Reducing emissions and waste Outcome 3 is of particular importance to the security sector: Improve conditions for workers and futureproof the ability of New Zealand business to trade: Government agencies will require suppliers in targeted industries to ensure their business, sub-contractors and domestic suppliers comply with employment standards and demonstrate good health and safety practice. This priority aims to protect workers from unfair and unsafe behaviour and incentivise well-performing firms while ensuring they are not undercut by firms who have reduced costs through adopting poor labour practices.

The initial industry sectors to be targeted are Security, Cleaning and Forestry.

Whilst the practicalities of determining good suppliers and poor suppliers is not specified, the cabinet briefing papers refer repeatedly to the important role Industry Associations will play in the process. We are confident that NZSA membership will be used as a key determinant in identifying those suppliers who government agencies deem as being appropriate to contract with. We will keep you posted on this.

NZSM

13

INDUSTRY

NZSA CEO Update New Zealand Security Association’s Gary Morrison provides an update on the NZSA MSD Work Broker Pilot Programme, Industry Survey, Special Interest Groups, the Industry Awards, and more.

NZSA MSD Work Broker Pilot Programme We have just passed the halfway stage of the pilot contract, and the results to date have exceeded all expectations.

21 members are signed up to the service, and as at the end of February we have placed 44 candidates into employment with those members. In addition, we have also paid in excess of $90,000 to these members as subsidies to assist with induction and training costs.

It is also pleasing to see that a third of the placements have been outside Auckland and in a range of roles, including patrol officers, event security, communication centre operators and trainee security technicians, as well as security guards. If you wish to find out more about utilising the service, contact Andrea on andrea@security.org.nz or 0274 502 020.

Site Safe – discount for NZSA members The NZSA is now a Trade Association member of Site Safe, which qualifies members for a 10 percent discount on their annual Site Safe subscription fee.

Site Safe has advised that it will recognise the discount on renewal notices to be issued in April, but we recommend that you check it is received and follow up if necessary.

Skills Business Advisory Service Skills have recently introduced a new initiative targeted at smaller tradespeople type businesses that brings together a group of trade experienced business advisors who will work with a business owner in a business advisory role free of charge and for up to six months (twelve sessions).

This is a great initiative, fully funded

by Skills, that could greatly assist the owners of smaller security companies in

14

NZSM

meeting the challenges of managing a business. For more information, refer to https://skills.org.nz/employers/businessadvisor-programme/ or email ambition@ skills.org.nz.

Security Awards Event 2019 This year’s event will be held at the Crowne Plaza in Auckland on the evening of Friday 23rd August and will be preceded that afternoon with presentations from four keynote speakers, including our industry Registrar, Trish McConnell.

We will provide more information over coming months but in the interim I recommend that you lock the date in your diary and start giving thought towards those deserving of nomination under the various award categories.

Industry survey Our thanks to all who participated in the survey, which the NZSA conducted in partnership with Massey University.

Massey University has been conducting follow up interviews with some respondents, which has slightly delayed the analysis phase. However, we will publish the outcomes in the next newsletter plus a feature article in the New Zealand Security Magazine.

Letters of Support This is not a service that we have previously promoted, however, we regularly provide letters of support to members to assist with matters such as security licence, work visa and immigration applications.

The NZSA has strong and credible relationships with government agencies, and from feedback received, our letters of support are viewed favourably. Feel free to give me a call to discuss how we can assist.

Special Interest Groups As reported in the last newsletter, we are in the process of establishing Special Interest Groups that will broaden the NZSA’s reach and provide forums for members and other subject matter experts to raise issues and concerns and to put forward recommended strategies and actions.

The ‘foundation SIG’ will be focused on industry training with a remit covering, but not limited to, the NZQA qualifications, training delivery, assessment processes (including recognition of prior learning) and professional development.

I have already received a healthy number of expressions of interest from those wishing to participate in the Training SIG, but I’m happy to receive further enquiries from those who wish to be involved. An update on progress and the formation of further SIG’ will be provided in our May newsletter.

April/May 2019

Intercom gets human.

Enter Hikvision’s updated video intercom solution‌ With high-quality vision and echo-cancellation technology that ensures superior voice transmission, hosts and their visitors can enjoy a warmer, more personal welcome to the home or workplace. The intercom solution also serves as an emergency response hub, ensuring families and businesses are empowered to take action in the event of unwelcome guests. Features include IP support cloud, Hikvision Lift Control compatibility, Hikvision CCTV integration, and free software.

Distributed by Website: www.atlasgentech.co.nz E-mail: orders@atlasgentech.co.nz

Website: www.nfs.co.nz E-mail: sales@nfs.co.nz

Hikvision New Zealand Ltd Level 1, Building B, 93-95 Ascot Avenue, Greenlane, Auckland 1052 +61 1300 557 450 sales.nz@hikvision.com

https://www.hikvision.com/au-en/

Beating traffic jams with intelligent video technology Traffic congestion in cities is a universal problem. Hikvision shows how the latest-generation video technology is helping authorities keep roads flowing and drivers accountable so we can all get from A to B quicker.

Globally, urban road networks are already saturated. This causes long delays for drivers, increasing frustration and reducing productivity. It also creates public health risks due to poor air quality.

Together, the effects of excessive traffic negatively impact city dwellers’ quality of life and the sustainability of their cities.

According to one study from INRIX, a leading provider of transport insights, Los Angeles commuters spent over 100 hours a year in traffic jams in 2017 – more than any other city in the world. Additionally, London traffic jams cost drivers the equivalent of £2,430 (USD$3,135) each, equal to more than £9.5 billion (USD$12.3 billion) across the city as a whole.

A major headache for city authorities Needless to say, traffic becomes a headache for city administrators, particularly in cities where the construction of modern roads is not keeping pace with increased vehicle ownership.

To find long-term solutions, city authorities are looking into the root causes of traffic congestion. In Hong Kong, the city’s Transport Advisory Committee published a report identifying the top-three causes of excessive traffic: (i) too many vehicles on roads; (ii) illegal parking; and (iii) too much road works – factors that all contribute to traffic jams in cities worldwide.

How technology can help In many cities, building new road capacity is not an option – either because of available space, disruption

16

NZSM

to economic activities, or budgetary constraints. In these circumstances, city authorities are beginning to look to smart technologies to make people’s journeys faster and safer.

In the portfolio of available traffic easing technologies, latest-generation video technology is the star. In particular, innovations in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and deep learning have transformed standard video monitoring with features that alert operators about traffic issues in real time. This allows them to take immediate action to keep lanes clear and to keep traffic flowing.

Next generation video solutions are already helping city authorities to reduce congestion and deliver major time savings for drivers. Three examples are: Traffic guidance This kind of solution uses smart cameras installed at intersections to monitor and report on real-time traffic flow. It works by constantly observing the flow

of traffic lanes, and by counting vehicles within defined areas of the road. Data is then sent to traffic management control centres where operators can see the build-up of traffic across the city.

Critically, this citywide view of traffic allows operators to take action in real time to reduce the root causes of congestion, such as misuse of bus/transit lanes or illegal parking.

In the event of a traffic incident, traffic guidance solutions are also great news for drivers.

Congestion information is displayed for them at each intersection, helping them predict their arrival time and – if delays are serious or persistent – to choose alternative routes or travel options.

While video is a critical element of the solution, full integration with thirdparty systems and algorithms is also needed. In this way, traffic data can be visualised on city maps and transmitted effectively to the control centre, drivers, emergency services, and others.

April/May 2019

Traffic signal control Traffic signal control solutions allow traffic lights to be coordinated to keep traffic flowing as freely as possible.

They consume traffic data from traffic guidance systems to understand where traffic is building up at an intersection.

To do this, intelligent traffic cameras count vehicles that cross an intersection as well as detect the length of vehicle queues at an intersection. They simultaneously share the real-time data with the traffic signal system.

Based on this data, traffic lights can be coordinated automatically to even out the traffic flow, giving traffic more or less priority, as needed, by extending or reducing the time available to cross the intersection. This helps to speed up journeys, reduce driver frustration and eliminate the need for manual intervention by traffic police when traffic builds up in a particular direction.

Hikvision Traffic flow cameras can be used as virtual detection loops that can act to reduce the cost for traffic flow and congestion optimisation. Hikvision has developed ISAPI (IP Surveillance API) with customised firmware to support metadata integration with thirdparty traffic controllers.

Metadata that can be abstracted from traffic cameras include: lane number,

April/May 2019

traffic, average Speed, traffic status, lane queue length, headway time, headway distance, lane time occupancy, lane space occupancy.

Traffic enforcement In many cases, traffic congestion is caused by illegal or irresponsible road use, such as illegal parking and use of bus lanes. With traffic enforcement video solutions, such as wrong-way driving detection, illegal U-turn and illegal parking detection, these kinds of incidents can be identified in real time, allowing operators in traffic control centres to alert authorities immediately. This makes it faster to react to incidents and remove obstacles on roads, while also holding drivers accountable.

As well as helping to reduce traffic congestion, traffic enforcement video solutions can also help to improve public safety. They can be used, for example, to detect drivers who run red lights, speed, or otherwise drive dangerously, and to take action against them.

Compared to traditional checkpoint speed measurement, Segment Speed Measurement provides higher levels of accuracy. Drivers are unable to avoid these cameras by installing detectors or using stealth coatings.

The trend of traffic enforcement technologies within the Australia and New Zealand markets is a combination of Automatic License Plate recognition (ANPR) function and generic traffic surveillance. Traditional road video monitoring is mainly used post-event, with generally lower efficiency and lower image quality.

Hikvision uses high resolution, high accuracy ANPR plus DarkFighter technology that can read licence plates from multiple traffic lanes and record them to a searchable database. License plate listings of vehicles of interest can be loaded into the database, and notifications received when their license plates are recognised.

A better future for congested cities With urban traffic management now topping the agenda for most city authorities, intelligent video technology is a beacon of hope. By monitoring traffic in real time, these kinds of solutions allow city authorities to take immediate action to ease bottlenecks – reducing driver frustration, reducing lost productivity and improving urban air quality.

Additionally, real-time incident detection helps to improve overall driving standards, ultimately reducing the number of accidents and saving lives.

As more and more city authorities begin to see the value of latestgeneration video solutions for traffic management, adoption of the technology is accelerating. This is especially the case where cities have been able to implement a suitable regulatory and funding structure to support the implement of these solutions.

To find out more about Hikvision intelligent traffic management with latest-generation video solutions, AI and deep learning, visit https://www.hikvision. com/en/Solutions/Traffic.

NZSM

17

Enterprise VMS: have it all, build it light, do it right Traditional VMS comes with heavy hardware, a high price tag and ongoing costs. Digifort’s globally recognised cutting-edge, open platform solution breaks the mould with a compelling lightweight, high-performance alternative.

Established in 1997, VST (NZ) Ltd has been a leader in the distribution of IT storage hardware in New Zealand for two decades. The Auckland-based company is synonymous with storage, and its team is widely reputed for their pre-sales advice, installation support and solid after sales and technical support across their product range.

Recently, the VST vision of bringing in the latest storage hardware to the New Zealand market was taken one step further with the signing of Digifort, the video surveillance software and video monitoring intelligence specialist.

“We’re delighted to be welcoming the Digifort brand to our range,” VST Sales Manager Douglas Leung told NZSM. “Digifort is a global innovator renowned for cutting-edge video surveillance technology admired by end-users around the world.”

With a presence in over 120 countries and a platform translated to over 18 languages, Digifort has been at the forefront of the digital video surveillance revolution since 2002 with its market-leading, open platform VMS. “The New Zealand market is well known for adopting new and emerging technologies,” said Digifort’s Australasia Sales Director Tooma Chong. “We’ve been looking for a good partner, and in VST I believe we’ve found it. They have a great image in the marketplace, they understand tech, and they are known for superior tech support.”

Video Management System (VMS) Digifort’s award-winning VMS is a truly open platform offering highest-quality performance, compatibility, and one of the industry’s lowest total costs of ownership. As an open platform VMS company and a certified ONVIF global partner, Digifort supports nearly every camera in the market today.

“Although we are a software developer ourselves, through collaboration we work with the best engine developers globally,” said Tooma. “This gives us the luxury of cherry-

Douglas Leung, Sales Manager VSTTooma Chong, Digifort Sales Director

picking the best in the industry and deeply yet seamlessly integrating their solutions into our single software platform.”

Its performance-driven architecture delivers one of the most responsive and lowest CPU and RAM demanding VMS in its class, creating an environment extremely light on IT infrastructure and light on hardware and maintenance costs.

“Analytics requires highly sophisticated back-end hardware and large numbers of servers, which can kill end user budgets,” said Tooma. “In some cases we can halve the number of servers needed, delivering sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars in IT infrastructure savings.”

It’s part of a philosophy of keeping things simple. “There’s no shortage of high tech driven software that is complicated for the end user,” he said. “We make it easy for the security officer in the control room to use, while providing all the enterprise features that are needed.”

But perhaps the most compelling feature of all relates to total cost of ownership. “Most of the VMS we compete with rely on recurring revenue, such as annual charges for updates, new releases, new features, etc,” explained Tooma. “Digifort doesn’t charge any annual fees – once you buy it you own it, and you are entitled to the upgrades and the technical support you need.”

Digifort ANPR Digifort ANPR is designed to read any vehicle license plate type in the world at any traffic speed. The fast, exact, automatic identification and recognition capabilities of this ANPR/LPR engine is suited to toll collection and congestion charging, traffic monitoring and security, speed and journey time measurement, bus lane and traffic light enforcement, parking, and access control systems.

18

NZSM

April/May 2019

Digifort ANPR is a core technology rather than a complete application, and it was specially designed to be easily integrated into complex intelligent traffic applications. As a flexible system, with its comprehensive functional libraries, it can be tailored to meet unique customer requirements.

In addition to plate numbers, Digifort ANPR also returns plenty of additional information, such as an image with the recognised plate(s) and the confidence level assigned to each character as well as the whole plate. The system also delivers country, state or province and plate type recognition; optional License plate colour recognition; and non-empty dangerous goods plate recognition included.

Fast, easy and straightforward use, Digifort ANPR is compatible with any image source (analog / digital / still images / MJPEG video streams).

Facial recognition The SAFR facial recognition platform from RealNetworks is seamlessly integrated with the Digifort VMS to identify individuals that are threats, concerns, strangers, employees, VIPs, known and unknown, as they move from camera to camera, using real-time SMS/email alerts and notifications.

The SAFR platform is architected to scale with rapid processing to detect and match millions of faces in real time.

Its computational performance enables it to recognise a face within 200 milliseconds with world-leading accuracy as tested

by NIST. The platform is specifically designed to detect and differentiate faces in photos and videos in the real world, including people in motion, under poor lighting, or when the subject wearing facial hair, glasses, face paint, or makeup, or is partially obscured. SAFR supports watchlists to recognise every fan, customer, employee, or guest –invited or not.

April/May 2019

Video Synopsis BriefCam is the industry’s leading provider of Video Synopsis® and Deep Learning solutions that make video searchable, actionable, and quantifiable. BriefCam’s video analytics platform is built on a unique fusion of Computer Vision and Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies empowering new and innovative efficiencies by extracting more value from video surveillance systems.

Digifort and BriefCam has integrated third party Video Synopsis® technology which help law enforcement, government, public and private security organisation and corporate users to achieve rapid video review, search and analysis via simultaneous presentation of events that occurred at different times.

The BriefCam V5 next generation platform enables rapid video review and search, quantitative video insights, and smart alerting, dramatically shortening the time-to-target for security threats while maximising safety and optimising operations.

The platform’s review module allows hours of video to be reviewed in minutes or even seconds. The system can pinpoint people and vehicles of interest, using an extensive range of appearance and movement filters, across multiple video sources.

Its video synopsis capability automatically extracts objects from the original video and efficiently reconstructs and superimposes them back in the original scene, simultaneously displaying events that have occurred at different times. The result is a dramatically shorter video segment that fully preserves the viewer’s ability to analyse the scene.

Using the system’s case management functions, the user is able to easily organise all video assets of an investigation in a single container, bookmark objects of interest, and summarise case findings (including all relevant exhibits) in an exportable report.

For more information or a demo, contact sales at VST on 09 444 8448, or visit https://www.vst.co.nz/digifort/

NZSM

19

Can the security industry be trusted?

Ethical questions around incentives and commissions in Australia’s banking industry, writes Institute for Business Ethics’ New Zealand Representative Jane Arnott, are worth asking within the context of New Zealand’s security industry.

With the banking sector already on the receiving end of a damning report – despite pleading that ‘it won’t happen again’ – the ethical behaviour of all sectors is now potentially in the spotlight.

In New Zealand, over recent months the final report of the Australian Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry has dominated headlines. Perhaps the most poignant summary of facts lies within the comment of Commissioner and former Australian High Court judge Kenneth Hayne who states, “we’ve called them (the banks) too big to fail … but they’re not too big to clean up their act for the good of the little guy.”

Right now, the impact and repercussions of non-financial risks to a sector or company is high on the business agenda. Trust is an essential component of any business relationship, but more so for a sector which safeguards security. Non-

Jane Arnott is IBE’s New Zealand Representative, and Director of JRA Associates.

20

NZSM

financial risks rise in importance when consumer trust and confidence is eroded.

Any sector that fails to live up to expectations about how they conduct their business – and how their employees behave – risks losing that trust, and as a result, its license to operate.

Questions to ask The question for the security industry is: could that happen to you? As an industry, are you confident that you are operating to highest ethical standards at all times?

Regulatory compliance is one measure to determine trustworthiness, but ethics begins where the law ends. While the law is black and white, ethical challenges inhabit the grey areas. It is impossible for regulatory authorities or the law to detail every situation, and that’s where a code of ethics, built on the industry’s values, can provide guidance for individuals to empower them to make decisions with responsibility and fairness. It is not a check list of instructions to follow.

The NZSA’s code of ethics prioritises integrity: “NZSA members shall maintain high standards of integrity and professional conduct with fairness and honesty at all times in dealing with clients or employees, past and present, with members of the NZSA and with the general public.”

Putting the customer first Fairness is good shorthand for talking about ethical issues. The Institute for Business Ethics (IBE) has three simple tests for helping with decision-making when faced with an ethical issue: 1. Transparency: do I mind others knowing about it?

2. Effect: who does my action affect?

3. Fairness: would my decision be considered fair by those affected?

The Australian Royal Commission identified how an aggressive sales culture created a toxic ethics environment in the banking industry. But whatever the business, in an environment where winning sales is paramount, good judgement is clouded. Short term, personal gains are prioritised over what service or product mix meets the customer’s needs.

Incentives There is pressure on all sides for companies to perform. The demand for profits means companies need to sell more, quicker, cheaper and retain more market share. Goal setting has long been seen as an effective management technique, and one which helps companies to measure and improve their performance. The best way for organisations to measure and report on how they are doing, both internally and externally, is to create targets and drive to meet them.

However, research indicates that although most people are basically honest, those who are set specific goals were more apt to cheat than those who were simply asked to ‘do their best’, regardless of whether there was financial encouragement.

Although employees respond well to the motivational use of targets and goals, it seems that when there is a lot at stake, for example, if a job is on the line or a significant bonus is in jeopardy, employees are more likely to behave unethically in order to achieve targets. If an employee cannot speak up or challenge then more is likely to be at risk, including ultimate reputation loss.

A climate of competition can encourage staff to put their personal goals (achieving the target, beating their colleagues) above those of the company

April/May 2019

or society at large. Micromanagement by managers under pressure to meet targets can create an atmosphere of mistrust.

Staff do not feel trusted, and in turn are placed under pressure to achieve ‘whatever it takes’; but at what cost?

A major NZX listed construction company fell after it was revealed that substantial bonuses had been paid out against winning major construction contracts through under bidding. The fall out continues to this day.

Within the Australian finance sector, banks that paid the highest commission for their products were seen to distort the customer focus. High incentives were viewed as influencing mortgage brokers to direct their clients to them.

This is an example of the downside of the pressure to reach targets. A lack of empathy for stakeholders, compounded by poor systems and controls meant that those tasked with overseeing operations did not understand what was going on in the organisation. This is the kind of bonus culture that needs to change.

Ethical incentives The adage that ‘what gets measured gets managed’ rings true. Acknowledging and celebrating ethical behaviour sends a signal that how you do your business is as important as what you achieve.

Incentivising ethics can have a positive effect throughout the organisation’s culture. The IBE’s Ethics at Work survey of New Zealand employees found that employees who work in organisations which offered incentives to encourage ethical behavior are more likely to agree that their line manager: • explains the importance of honesty and ethics in the work that they do (81 percent vs 48 percent), • sets a good example of ethical behavior (84 percent vs 63 percent) and • supports employees in following the organisations standards of ethical behavior (80 percent vs 60 percent).

April/May 2019

Employees who have been aware of misconduct during the past year at their place of work and who work in organisations that provide ethical incentives are also more likely to have spoken up about their concerns (83 percent) than those in similar position in organisations that do not (57 percent).

Commissions Commission structures can often be contentious, especially when there is a lack of transparency. This usually means when customers have no idea that a commission is being paid, the quantum involved, or when organisations fail to assess the risk that commissions may pose in influencing recommendations.

Within the Australian finance sector, big commission-based incentives offered by the banks were viewed as influencing mortgage brokers to direct their clients to them. It was found that when commissions are based on the size of the loan, the incentive, or risk, is too great for mortgage brokers to recommend higherthan-needed loans.

Further, a 2017 study of the home loan industry by investment bank UBS found that up to a third of mortgages were ‘liar loans’ that may have been massaged to help the borrower get a bigger loan than they should have been eligible for.

It is unsurprising, therefore, that the Australian Royal Commission included the recommendation that all commissions ultimately be axed and replaced with upfront fees paid by the borrower, or customer, rather than the bank.

The questions for the security industry could well be around the incidence of commission payments and how these may be influencing subsequent judgment and recommendations.

Market characteristics Some sectors present with characteristics that trigger a need for caution or selfreflection. If we look once more to the financial sector, the New Zealand’s

Capital Markets Development (CMD) taskforce’s comment that “in New Zealand financial advisers had varying degrees of expertise and independence and an associated low reputation,” could equally refer to the security industry.

The CMD report, Baseline Review of Financial Advisers in New Zealand, went on: “As a result, the behaviour of poor quality financial advisers in the market could adversely affect the reputation of other high quality advisers and reduce consumer confidence in the market more generally.”

The pointers here, while not confined to any one sector, generally highlight four key areas that could contribute to loss of consumer confidence and lead to unintended consequences. They are: 1. low entry requirements 2. lack of transparency 3. low reputation 4. varying degrees of expertise and independence Is the security industry at risk of tumbling consumer confidence? That’s a question best discussed and answered from within.

What the IBE can say is that where there is a public perception that business is not being held accountable for its actions it follows that there is significant negative impact on how much people trust organisations to contribute to the development of society. The security industry would be no exception to this.

It is paramount that organisations of all sizes step up their commitment to be a positive driver of change, adopting governance frameworks that go beyond what is required by law.

In the fast pace of technological advances, it can take time for the law and governance structures to keep pace, which is why an ethical culture is a critical component. With developments in artificial intelligence, applying ethical values to decision-making can help ‘do the right thing’ as new territories are explored, with the NZSA’s public interest value at the heart.

Setting the tone from the top, making explicit the ethical values and frameworks that reward ethical decisions goes a long way to guide employee behaviour and promote integrity.

Using ethical values as a guide will help the security industry deal with emerging issues like cyber security, and potential conflicts of interest between customers, society and the business. An ethical awareness will build a strong reputation that the sector can be trusted.

NZSM

21

Organisational culture as a precipitator to crime David Horsburgh PSP PCI CPP writes that an organisational culture that treats customers without respect may lead to violence against staff. It’s something, he argues, that a postAshburton review of the MSD security environment failed to consider.

In a ‘Response For Information’ issued by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) in early 2019, the Ministry wrote “We help people in all sorts of ways.

Whatever the situation, we try our best to understand and connect people with all the support we can. We seek to do this with integrity and compassion, driven by our purpose to help New Zealanders be safe, strong and independent.”

The most fitting response to this statement is a quote from American novelist, playwright and activist, James Baldwin, who said, “I can’t believe what you say, because I see what you do.”

Italian criminologist and social theorist, Tamar Pitch, in her book Pervasive Prevention: A Feminist’s Reading of the Rise of the Security Society, argues

David Horsburgh CPP PSP PCI

22

NZSM

that we no longer look for the cause of crime and social disorder, we simply put protective measures in place as threat mitigation strategies. The validity of this proposition, I argue, is illustrated by the actions of MSD. In the aftermath of the September 2014 shootings at the Ashburton office of the MSD, the Chief Executive commissioned an independent review of the MSD Security Environment.

The terms of reference for the review specifically stated: “The Review will not include consideration of the case management or services provided to the alleged offender.”

Were the terms of reference a ploy by the Chief Executive to steer the Independent Reviewers away from an analysis of the organisation’s culture?

Did anyone within the Ministry have the courage to critically and objectively examine the culture within the MSD and give consideration to the possibility that it might have been a contributing factor to those tragic events? The behaviour of MSD post-Ashburton would suggest that no such analysis occurred, or if it did, no remedial action followed.

In his text Environmental Criminolog y and Crime Analysis, Richard Wortley describes three offender types, (i) antisocial predators, (ii) mundane offenders, and (iii) provoked offenders. The provoked offender is one who “reacts to a particular set of environmental circumstances – situational frustrations, irritations, social pressures.” The crimes of the provoked offender may include impulsive crimes of violence, often resulting from a temporary loss of selfcontrol.

As also argued by Shlomo Shoham in Rational Choice and Situational Crime Prevention, “a pattern of communication

which is overtly or latently provoking” may lead to a “limitation of rational choice to the point of no return, where the violent option becomes highly probable.” I assert that the culture within MSD is a contributing factor to threats and acts of violence against its staff.

Within MSD offices, following the Ashburton incident, physical security measures were implemented, premises were target hardened, uniformed manpower was deployed at each site and staff received additional security awareness training in an intelligence-led response. A culture of fear encouraged within the organisation ensured that the primary focus from senior executives through to front office staff was on the safety of its own personnel, rather than on flaws within its service delivery.

The following case studies illustrate inappropriate and disgraceful behaviour of MSD staff towards its clients, a culture of disrespect and contempt, and processes based on winning at all costs. These have the potential to create environmental precipitators that can result in abusive and threatening behaviour by clients who are desperate for assistance.

On 3 April 2011, Wendy Shoebridge, a 41-year-old mother and a client of MSD, was found dead in her home. Her death was classified as suspected suicide.

Wendy had a history of suffering from severe depression.

The day before her death, Wendy received by letter, advice from the Ministry that she was to be prosecuted over an alleged $22,000 benefit fraud.

In 2017, at a Coroner’s Inquest into Wendy’s death, evidence was presented by a Ministry manager that she had not committed any such fraud.

April/May 2019

on

e c u r i ty I

ar

Z

S ’s

mited 30 y Li e

nd

Loktr

ic

y tr s u

ss

ervicing

N

Loktronic for Sales, Service and Support

Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK mail@loktronic.co.nz www.loktronic.co.nz

At that hearing, the MSD investigator who had drafted the letter claimed he had told his manager that Wendy suffered from depression, that she should not be prosecuted and he suggested that he visit her in person. The investigator claimed that he was instructed to prosecute and was denied permission to see Wendy personally. Another witness described the MSD office as dysfunctional and the manager a bully.

After the Inquest, MSD released information showing it had spent $297,070 engaging eight lawyers to represent the Ministry and its staff at the Coroner’s hearing. This staggering amount did not include internal legal counsel costs.

Barbara Cooke, the mother of Wendy Shoebridge is quoted in a Stuff article of 12 June 2017 as saying, “I actually don’t think they [MSD] have learnt very much. They are prepared to pay up to potentially a million dollars on in-house lawyers … to then deny that they did cause Wendy’s death. To me that was monstrous.” An MSD manager reported they considered the legal costs were reasonable.

This ‘win-at-all-costs’ attitude is further illustrated in a decision of the Social Security Appeal Authority (case NZSSAA 2017-064). In this case, an

24

NZSM

applicant for superannuation, who was born and worked his entire life in New Zealand, was denied his ‘old-age pension’ on the grounds that his wife, who was not a client of MSD, would not sign a contract with the Ministry undertaking to report every time she travelled overseas, was hospitalised, changed personal relationships or changed her bank account.

These conditions are included in every written superannuation application form as if they are a statutory requirement. They are not!

In this case, the Ministry denied the applicant his superannuation entitlement, delayed the appeals process and went to great lengths to starve the applicant into submission and coerce his wife into signing the form. The following table illustrates the timeline and obstructive tactics used by the Ministry: The Chairman of the Social Security Appeal Authority stated, “… it might be thought that in New Zealand today the concept that the applicant has authority over the spouse to instruct her to sign the document [and forego her human rights], is simply repugnant and frankly it is to me.” Throughout the eighteenmonth process there were numerous precipitators that could have triggered the applicant into abusive or threatening

behaviour over a matter in which the Ministry was clearly acting unlawfully.

Even after the SSAA decision in favour of the applicant, payment of the applicant’s superannuation was withheld, and it was not until the intervention of the applicant’s local MP that the Ministry finally complied with the SSAA decision.

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner has now formed the view that the New Zealand Superannuation application form, in its present format, is in breach of Principles 1 and 4 of the Privacy Act 1993. In spite of the SSAA decision and the findings of the Privacy Commissioner, the Ministry continues to use the flawed application form.

The third example also involved the Social Security Appeal Authority (NZSSAA 2017-052). The female beneficiary, to which this case refers, had a reputation for using abusive and threatening language towards Ministry staff, although it is reported that the Police considered her harmless.

The Ministry placed all dealing with the beneficiary in the hands of a Remote Client Unit where she would have no physical contact with MSD staff, further alienating her from the system.

The beneficiary was denied various benefits to which she considered herself entitled, and she appealed

April/May 2019

to the Ministry’s internal Benefits Review Committee (BRC). Following its rulings against her, she appealed to the independent SSAA. The Authority subsequently reported the following: 1. The Remote Client Unit “deliberately omitted key information relating to the beneficiary’s circumstances that could have led to a wrong and unfair conclusion.”

2. The BRC used fake names in its official correspondence to the SSAA. 3. BRC members signed fake names on legal documents it forwarded to the SSAA. 4. An MSD manager tried to secretly communicate with the chairman of the SSAA to disparage the beneficiary.

It is reported that the chief executive of MSD attempted to justify using false names and signatures on judicial documents by saying, “Pseudonyms protect them from being identified and potentially placed at greater risk of harassment, threats or even violence both within and outside of their work environment.”

The SSAA in reply stated, “It is difficult to imagine a more effective way of undermining public confidence in the independence of this Authority, than for it to acquiesce to the Chief Executive’s conduct of these appeals”. The Authority declined a request from BRC to use fake names and referred the matter to the Solicitor-General.

The Ministry of Social Development took the matter to the High Court, and it is reported that on 25 September 2018 Justice David Collins ruled that the use of fictitious names and signatures breached the right to natural justice because the beneficiary would be unable to challenge the members’ impartiality or their qualifications. The MSD argument that the health and safety of its BRC members was at risk if they used their correct names was rejected by Justice Collins.

It was a further example of a Ministry culture of acting unreasonably and unlawfully, contemptuously denying beneficiaries access to natural justice.

My final example is sourced from a 2018 interview between Radio New Zealand journalist Guyon Espiner and Alistair Russell, a spokesperson for Action Against Poverty. Alistair Russell characterised the culture within MSD as ‘toxic’ and described gatekeeping procedures at MSD offices, such as uniformed security guards and filtering

April/May 2019

processes used at reception as measures to deny people access to state assistance entitlements.

Russell said the toxic culture makes the needy “feel humiliated and embarrassed.” He said the MSD had “twenty reasons” to sanction people, to punish them, to stop or reduce their benefits, to give them thirteen-week stand-downs.

The erection of barriers, the hardening of environments, the use of gatekeepers and the restrictions on freedom of movement into MSD offices will not ultimately address and resolve the fundamental question, why does animosity exist between the Ministry and its clients?

Security is as much about the protection of values, including human dignity, as about the provision of a secure environment for physical safety.

An organisation that condones judgemental attitudes by staff towards its clients, putting policies and procedures above the welfare of beneficiaries, emb-arrassing and humiliating those who seek state assistance and adopting processes based on winning at all costs, will forever be an organisation with physical barriers between itself and its clients.

Was convicted murderer Russell John Tully a man who had reached breaking point, a man who had, as reported in the local press, returned to Ashburton suffering a serious illness, a man who had nothing to lose? Did MSD analyse those tragic events from the perspective of whether the Ministry’s culture was a contributing factor. If so, why does a ‘toxic culture’ that tolerates humiliation and disrespect continue to exist within the Ministry today?

As James Baldwin stated, “the most dangerous creation of any society is the man who has nothing to lose.”

Richard Wortley argues that for the provoked offender, “situations provide the impetus to offend… They are reactors to the immediate environment.”

Relieving the precipitators may be “sufficient to prevent offending.”

The challenge for the security industry, and in particular security consultants, is to dig deeper into the causes of harm, identify the triggers that lead to abusive and threatening behaviour and to have the courage to tell clients when their organisation’s culture is a contributing factor.

A bibliography including links to press reports available on request by emailing: david@srm.co.nz.

SUBSCRIBE Readers of NZ Security include those working directly and indirectly in the domestic and commercial security industry. From business owners and managers right through to suppliers, installers and front line staff.

Among our readers are IT security experts, surveillance professionals and loss prevention staff.

Our readers take their job seriously and make an active choice to be kept informed and up to date with the industry.

For only $75.00 plus GST you can ensure that you receive a 1 year subscription (6 issues) by filling out the form below and posting to: New Zealand Security Magazine 27 West Cresent, Te Puru, 3575 RD5, Thames, New Zealand or email your contact and postal details to: craig@defsec.net.nz Mr Mrs Ms________________________ Surname_________________________ Title_____________________________ Company________________________ Postal Address____________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ Telephone________________________ Email____________________________ Date_____________________________ Signed___________________________

NZSM New Zealand Security Magazine

NZSM

25

SURVEILLANCE

SSC Report and Surveillance: Big brother looking out for you?

James Knapp, Principal Consultant at Stag Risk Management, writes that the SSC Inquiry into the use of external security consultants by government agencies raises more urgent questions than answers.

The report from the State Services Commission (SSC) investigation into government agencies’ use of private security providers, and in particular the private investigation firm Thompson and Clark Investigations Limited (TCIL), was widely reported as ‘scathing’.

‘Paradoxical’ is perhaps a better description, raising the question, “Okay, so what do we do now?”

On releasing the report, State Services Commissioner Peter Hughes stated, “It is never acceptable for an agency to undertake targeted surveillance of a person just because they are lawfully exercising their democratic rights – including their right to freedom of expression, association and right to protest. That is an affront to democracy.”

I don’t think one would find a single New Zealander in disagreement with that statement. I strongly doubt any public servant or agency would ask for surveillance ‘just because’ someone is expressing an opinion; rather I suspect the concern would come from how they were expressing it.

No public servant wakes up in the morning determined to use their work to trample on people’s rights. Yet since the inquiry, the media, activist groups and even security commentators seem to have used a very broad brush to paint all commercial intelligence-gathering and threat assessment activities as antidemocratic.

According to the SSC website, the inquiry “looked at TCIL’s reporting to government agencies on ‘issue motivated groups’, which treated those groups as a security threat.”

Did all agencies really consider issuemotivated groups (IMGs) to be security threats, or is that a generalisation? If the generalisation is broadly accurate: was that position based on the advice provided by TCIL, was it tribalism (“your group is opposed to my group, therefore you pose a threat to me”), or was it perhaps a genuine misunderstanding of the nature of the risk?

I personally never regarded any ‘group’ as a threat. A group is made up of individuals who, like all members of

James Knapp specialises in health, safety and physical security for remote workers who face high-risk situations. He is a member of the NZIPI and IIRSM.

26

NZSM

society, sit somewhere on a spectrum from great to awful. I have categorically ruled out several individual activists as safety threats, saving time and stress, largely thanks to advice from TCIL. However, in order to work out who might be and who is not a threat, one has to look at the bigger picture. Is it fair to monitor the public activities of a group in order to detect and prevent offences?

I asked Gavin Clark, Director of TCIL, for comment about whether IMGs are a threat. He was adamant that “TCIL believe in and embrace the right to freedom of speech and expression”, adding that “TCIL have never prevented any lawful protest or activist group exercising their democratic rights”. He confirmed that they did monitor the activities of certain IMGs to detect unlawful protest activity that could threaten people or the continuity of legitimate business.

It seems fair to me that everyone should expect to attract some scrutiny if, in the course of expressing their opinion, they display concerning or threatening behaviour, if they do so in a public place or forum where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

We have rights, but we also have a responsibility to exercise those rights in a way that does not frighten other people, solicit or incite violence or obstruct the carrying on of a lawful business.

The risk While it is indeed the case that not all activists pose a threat to people or the organisations they oppose, it is equally true some fixated or extremist persons or elements within those IMGs could, and have, posed a genuine security risk to the lawful activities of the organisations they oppose.

April/May 2019

Threatening interpersonal situations and direct action are uncommon, but they do occur regularly and they rarely make the news. Some examples of anti1080 threats from the recent past include: • Agitated persons visiting an office and yelling at staff • Veiled threats to place man-traps that would cause injury to workers • Threats or intimidation delivered directly from one person to another • Online threats to behead, shoot, assault or poison workers • Accosting, following and personally abusing off- and on-duty workers • Various attempts to sabotage or disrupt operations, such as attempting to illegally access active helicopter landing sites; scattering ‘Z’ nails on access routes; felling trees across access roads (in one case felling two large native trees); sabotaging equipment, such as fuel trailers; and threatening to shoot down helicopters.

The vast majority of contemporary threats come to staff attention via social media; they are usually non-specific and not targeted at any individual person.

However, sometimes posts target an individual and this can cause distress.

Online posts that cause serious emotional distress may breach the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.

A common tactic that is not necessarily a threat, but is potentially harmful, is that of ‘naming and shaming’ individual company directors or workers. While the original post itself may not be a criminal offence as it may not be threatening in nature, many of the comments or replies are vitriolic and sometimes threatening.

The fact that the originator does not always remove threatening comments only lends weight to the presumption that by ‘naming and shaming’ they intend to intimidate the target person or organisation.

A recent trend is the ironic labelling of 1080 use as “terrorism” along with attempts to suggest or justify extremist action.

The need Workplaces have a legal and moral duty of care to protect people from workrelated risks to their health and safety, including their mental health. If an employer knows of a risk, it is incumbent upon them to assess and then eliminate or minimise the risk, whether it has been realised or not (yet). It is expected that

April/May 2019

organisations, whether Government or commercial, will take reasonable steps to ensure their own security.

Good practice involves not just a general security risk assessment, but also an assessment of every threat or concerning client interaction.

An essential element of risk management is risk analysis and evaluation. Since statistics on violent incidents in New Zealand are limited, it is instructive to look overseas to gain statistically significant insights.

For example, the most common venue for mass killings in the United States, including active shooter events, is commercial workplaces, not schools.

Sadly, we are not immune in New Zealand - client violence against workers is a serious risk, with the shootings in Northland and Ashburton being extreme examples.

It is essential that concerning interactions are internally reported and assessed for threat potential.

The US Secret Service has noted that over three-quarters of mass killers in 2017 “made concerning communications and/or elicited concern from others” before attacking, while an FBI study of 63 active shooters from 2000-2013 found that a shooter will have displayed on average four to five concerning behaviours. It seems unlikely that any aggrieved person will stew to the point of violence entirely in silence.

Yet paragraph 1.16 of the Inquiry’s report contained the judgement that it “[does] not consider that health and safety obligations require or justify surveillance [including the monitoring of social media] of individuals or groups by external security consultants in circumstances such as these. The company’s other actions to mitigate the risks were appropriate, including physical security measures, and staff training in de-escalation strategies. For more serious concerns, the proper response was to seek assistance from the Police” [my emphasis].

This implies that an organisation needs to define ‘serious concern’. Should they just report every veiled threat or concerning client interaction? The Police are unlikely to continue to respond every time a client becomes upset or abusive.

That doesn’t seem to be a sensible use of Police resources.

Conflict is unavoidable, but violence does not always result, and people should not be afraid of harmless venting if they are trained to deal with it. To filter ‘serious concerns’ from normal conflict or trifling abuse, some form

of threat assessment may be needed. A threat assessment may include having an independent specialist make objective observations of a client’s tone and behaviour. At a public meeting held on private property, for example.

Proportionality Intelligence-led risk and threat assessment saves time, money and stress.

The traditional (and largely pointless) approach to health and safety risk assessment is to multiply likelihood and consequence using a simple 5 x 5 matrix.

That approach does not suit security risk management, because: 1. The consequences of a single rare event can be catastrophic; 2. Risk is not static; and 3. A purely consequential risk assessment could lead to a constant state of high alert.

If every threat or risk event is treated equally, risk may appear to be cumulative rather than dynamic. Ramping up security levels in response to multiple events will eventually translate into a state of constant high alert.

This is undesirable because normal business becomes inefficient, security measures may become prohibitively expensive and the effects of alertness can be damaging. Constant alertness (hypervigilance) can cause unnecessary alarm, stress, and an unnecessarily defensive approach to all client interactions. Conversely, it may result in complacency at the exact wrong time.

Therefore, in assessing emergent security threats from external sources, security managers consider three main elements: capability/means, intent/motivation, and vulnerability/ opportunity. Occasionally, a practitioner might seek specialist advice in relation to the likelihood that a specific person will commit violence.

Under the government Protective Security Requirements (PSR), an agency must have a system for setting alert levels. The outcome of a new risk assessment or a specific threat assessment is aligned with a response measures table, which sets out proportionate response measures. Responses are time-limited and cease when the situation normalises.

For example, where social media monitoring detects an online threat to assault staff as they depart their office, a threat assessment may indicate that the originator has a low chance of success. Weighed against the potential consequences of success, staff may

NZSM

27

be informed that there is a low risk of protest action and be reminded of standard security protocols, but with no additional security measures implemented.

Proactivity vs reactivity In his book Protecting People in New Zealand, Carlton Ruffell CPP, PSP rightly states, “Those responsible for the security of people should not just wait for threat material to arrive on their desks”.

I take that to mean that those who become aware of the existence of a general risk should then make efforts to proactively detect threats using intelligence gathering. Intelligencegathering works like a funnel, with a broad collection mechanism to source data internally and from outside the organisation, which is then progressively sieved by analysis until it is either disseminated for action or discarded as irrelevant.

Criminal offences have been successfully detected, and in some cases prevented, through intelligence-led risk management, yet the SSC maintains that the surveillance of groups should not occur. If surveillance is defined as broadly as the SSC defines it, how can an agency proactively scan for threats that they can then report to Police?

There is, to my knowledge, no Government-led service that provides the kind of low-level security intelligence

28

NZSM

service provided by TCIL; it is a gap that is not quite covered by either Police or NZSIS, and that otherwise remains unfilled. Adding to the gap is the fact that information-sharing between agencies is complex, and threat information isn’t shared among Government agencies, let alone commercial organisations that face similar threats – sometimes from the same people.

So what now?

Perhaps the intelligence function could be brought in-house. If so, what is the qualification or experience necessary for intelligence and threat assessment? Does, or should, that capability exist in every organisation and state agency?

Agencies are prevented from comparing notes on persons of concern – despite anecdotal evidence that a person inappropriately interacting with one organisation will often have had run-ins with another. That means an internal capability would have to be duplicated in every agency, but there simply is not enough qualified security managers in New Zealand to fill those potential vacancies.

Building an in-house capability and delivery without a solid framework and tight protocols might also present the same or greater reputational and ethical risks as outsourcing.

Worse, the report may suggest to

organisations that their safest option, in terms of reputational risk, is to treat every client as a potential threat. That means installing expensive and disproportionate physical security controls, such as holding their clients at the door or confronting them with a uniformed guard.

To me, that seems not only disproportionate but also inefficient and potentially counter-productive. Simply transferring the risk of interpersonal conflict or attack to a lightly trained security guard without screening technology, defensive equipment or legislated powers beyond that of an ordinary citizen, is neither fair nor a very effective control for the risk they are put there to prevent or respond to.

Health, safety and security practice demands that practitioners do not wait for harm to occur before acting to prevent it. Yet without evidence to back a ‘serious concern’, or evidence that a serious offence is imminent, Police are usually unable to act.

Without monitoring, how do organisations gather the evidence to form a judgement on what is a ‘serious concern’? Should they assume that every member of an opposed group is of equally good character, with equally peaceful intentions?

It seems illogical and irresponsible to allow a known risk to be realised before taking any action.

April/May 2019

on

e c u r i ty I Z

S ’s

ss

ervicing

N Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK mail@loktronic.co.nz www.loktronic.co.nz

ar

Loktronic for ex-stock availability

mited 30 y Li e

nd

Loktr

ic

y tr s u

Air Borders – Protected but porous Philip Wood MBE, Head of the School of Aviation and Security at Buckinghamshire New University, writes that although technology is a proven border control enabler, those who use it are the greatest disablers of its effectiveness.

While there will always be a moral argument about who is permitted and entitled to cross borders, what credentials they need and criteria that they need to fulfil, border control is a necessity. If we think about what ‘border control’ means to many, this definition is a good place to begin: ‘Border control means measures adopted by a country to regulate and monitor its borders. It depicts a country’s physical demonstration of territorial sovereignty. It regulates the entry and exit of people, animals and goods across a country’s border. It aims at fighting terrorism and detecting the movement of criminals across the borders.

In addition, it also regulates both legal and illegal immigration, collects excise taxes, prevents smuggling of illegal and hazardous material such as weapons, drugs, or endangered species, and prevents the spread of human or animal diseases. The degree of strictness at a border control varies depending upon the country and the border concerned.’ (USlegal.com) That seems to cover most aspects of border control and management. However, it gives a simplistic overview of what is a complicated issue, which becomes much more complicated when aviation, with its flexibility and multiple layers of activity and technology as well as the speed and pace of transit times and the diversity and sheer numbers of air travellers, are factored into the processes and concepts involved.

Organisations such as ICAO are responsible for – and responsive to – this need to balance protection and permission, saying in their Traveller Identification Programme (TRIP) Guide that the “flow of travellers overwhelmingly benefits States, and as such, Border Control Management (BCM) arrangements should facilitate timely and cost-efficient processing of genuine travellers while simultaneously identifying, managing and mitigating risks, and responding to threats.”

This conflict of needs brings significant challenges, with the aviation sector (and its governance bodies, governments and political influencers) attempting to manage the balance whilst transporting legitimate passengers and freight alongside criminals, smuggled goods and organisms, and those who are not necessarily criminals but who do not meet country entry criteria. How can Aviation balance the ‘need to say no’ with the ‘need to flow’?

Firstly, it is important to understand the diversity and scale of the problem and how airlines and airports can facilitate illicit movement and activity; also, how they can prevent it.

We are all familiar with the physical barriers in place at both ends of the passenger journey; and with the varying levels of checks and pre-checks that are carried out to identify that we are who we say we are, and that what we are carrying is legitimate, or legitimately ours. We have scanning, biometrics, personnel detection and surveillance systems and chemical trace detection. Our passports are checked against

30

NZSM

databases, manifests and other waypoints, ticketing and baggage movement are automated and supported by technology throughout; from passenger lists to our smart luggage tags.

But still air borders can be porous. The problem that the US has recognised and dealt with in its own way is that despite the types of regulation and governance that do work being put in place at their airports; those in sending countries may be less reliable – so they push their border controls out to those countries and impose their own checks there.

It’s a little ‘Roman Empire’; but if we want to travel to the US for work and leisure, that’s the arrangement in place.

These hard measures are designed to manage the issue, and it is fair to say that by and large they are effective. In terms of other integrated approaches, the ICAO TRIP guidance offers potential solutions – or at least concepts for providing them, based on its five interlinked elements:

ICAO’s five interlinked elements. Note; MRTD = Machine Readable Travel Documents. Source: ICAO TRIP Guide.

These are well thought-out components of a strong identification management ‘ecosystem’, and ICAO’s guide explains them carefully and in detail. Importantly, ICAO also recognises and clearly emphasises the disparity in capabilities across national borders and infrastructures; and the need to factor that limitation into any assumptions or misconceptions about the security or otherwise of a border control system and workflow.

April/May 2019

Because of that, the ICAO TRIP Guide is a well thought out, detailed document and recommended for those who need to know more about the principles and limitations of air travel and border controls.

Back in the US, where guides are translated into measures, layers of capability and detection are further imposed by the DHS, TSA and organisations such as the Orwellian sounding Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM), whose role (according to its website) is to: ‘protect the nation by providing biometric identification services that help federal, state, and local government decision makers accurately identify the people they encounter and determine whether those people pose a risk to the United States. OBIM supplies the technolog y for collecting and storing biometric data, provides analysis, updates its watchlist, and ensures the integrity of the data.’

However, the reality of security management in the context of border controls, despite the multiple technologies and processes that have been developed to manage the flexibility, reach and scale of the aviation challenge, differs from the concept.

The main problem with any security system, regardless of its sector or application, is the people who interact with it. Poorly trained, lazy, overworked and overwhelmed staff who face never-ending cohorts of fast moving distracted, and sometimes aggressive legitimate passengers will always have the potential for failure – and security gaps will appear.

In most cases, where legitimate passengers either purposely or by omission do get through, the consequences may be minimal. However, a determined and well-organised criminal, terrorist or illegal immigrant will scan, identify and bypass such touchpoints of human weakness – and the consequences have the potential to be quite significant.

And the errors can be straightforward. The most effective measures cannot stop those overburdened airport staff from making occasional or repeated mistakes. As an example, according to a 2018 UK Home Office report (quoted in Airport Technolog y): ‘…over 11,000 travellers have unintentionally avoided UK border checks between 2013 and 2017 due to a lack of clear directions… there has been a 70% increase in the number of passengers who were misdirected, from 1,364 in 2016 to 2,328 in 2017. Further statistics from a Freedom of Information request show that the Border Force recorded 2,394, 2,665 and 2,278 misdirected passengers in 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively.’

Despite Home Office assurances of follow up and measures to deal with the problem, this was simply about people being sent in the wrong direction and bypassing security without even knowing about it. No ICAO guide can stop that.

So, at first glance we can look at aviation and border control and consider that we have made significant strides and advances in the face of dynamic, emerging and smart threats in a changing world. Technology is the greatest single enabler of the basis for a multi-layered and wide-ranging security management system. Conversely, those who use it are the greatest disablers of its effectiveness.

And, really, at this stage we are really only thinking about the ‘good guys’. Once we begin to factor in the legitimate issues of human rights and privacy and the sheer inventiveness and undoubted determination of those who wish to act illegally or do harm to society, the balance of power and advantage begins to shift, which on the balance of probabilities means that on occasion, real damage can be the result.

April/May 2019

Hills appoints new GM for New Zealand business

Hills Ltd has appointed Michael Collins as General Manager, New Zealand (NZ).

Based in Auckland, Collins is tasked with improving customer engagement, driving value for vendors and cultivating a strong sales focus across NZ branches.

Collins brings 20 years of security industry experience to the position, having held senior management roles with Gallagher Security, New Zealand including Vice President Sales and Marketing of the Americas and Regional Sales Manager New Zealand & Pacific. Prior to that, Collins was employed as Regional Sales Manager with UTC Fire & Security, New Zealand.

CEO and Managing Director, David Lenz, said Collins will play an important role as Hills seeks to accelerate sales growth in its security and surveillance business along with driving growth across all NZ divisions including health and AV. “Michael understands the NZ market and will utilise his local knowledge and networks to develop opportunities and capitalize on infrastructure projects planned for the future.

“His commitment to excellent service and collaboration makes him a perfect fit with our corporate culture,” Lenz said. “His proven leadership skills will be invaluable as we re-focus the business and drive market growth to ensure Hills remains the leading value-add building technologies distributor across ANZ.” Collins said he was excited to join Hills at a time when there were significant opportunities to improve the business and increase sales growth.

“I’m looking forward to working with the NZ team and developing a plan to move the business forward,” Collins said.

NZSM

31

CHRISTCHURCH

Countering terrorism where there used to be no terrorism to counter The failure to prevent the Christchurch attack is a collective one, writes Dr John Battersby of Massey University’s Centre for Defence and Security Studies.

It is indeed the case that those responsible for our national security were acutely aware than if an event, such as the Christchurch attack, was to occur that they would be challenged about why they didn’t see it coming or why they failed to prevent it. Within hours of the 15 March attack precisely those questions were asked and the event described as an ‘intelligence failure’.

Outside the Deans Avenue mosque thousands of people came in the hours and days following the atrocity that occurred there, their quiet, subdued and respectful demeanour exuding a collective solemnity that powerfully

Dr John Battersby of Massey University’s Centre for Defence and Security Studies

32

NZSM

underscored the enormity of that failure.

I was there the day after, and watching it, and feeling it, left me in no doubt there had indeed, been a massive and tragic failure.

But it is a failure not to be sheeted to a small section of our law enforcement and intelligence community, it is a failure we all share a part in causing.

We have for far too long assumed that we had not previously been affected by terrorism.

It is clear that a careful review of New Zealand’s past events from 1970 showed the reality of lone actors prepared to use violence or the threat of violence to articulate political or religious ideological messages. Yet we didn’t remember them, we didn’t take the lessons out of them that were there. We have never adequately legislated for terrorism at any point in our recent history and we still have not.

New Zealand has previous examples of lone actors legally acquiring arsenals of weapons, and of mass killings. These are few and far between but they are there, and the fact that there have been clear inadequacies in our Arms Act since it was passed in 1983 has been raised by many.

No significant changes have been made to our Arms legislation since, and consequently we allowed the Christchurch offender to legally arm himself with multiple military style weapons designed to kill volumes of people. He demonstrated how effectively we succeeded in letting him do this.

We have for far too long believed that our geographical isolation has insulated

us from terrorism. We have had safe and distant seats observing the global rise of modern violent extremism over the past 20 years. We have watched the internet and social media eliminate geography and distance as factors affecting the terrorscape and yet we continued to believe that we were immune.

As a society, we genuinely believed that the absence of modern terrorism here was because we were too good, too caring, too laid back and too far away. The mass murder of 15 March hideously exposed the fact that we are not. The perpetrator streamed his assault as an audience around the globe watched, some cheering him on. We are not some distant land too far for terrorists to notice – cyberspace has placed us in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas. Our 9/11 has now come. The possibility that it would come, has existed for some considerable time.

Inevitably there will be a torturous process of establishing how the 15 March attacker planned his attack. In hindsight, with the outcome now certain, critics will retrospectively spot the ‘flags’ that could have alerted security agencies to the fact this man was a clear and present risk which should have been acted on.

Allegations have been made that security eyes were focused in the wrong place - on violent jihadism instead of right wing extremism, which on the face of it, looks like a possibility.

But predicting events that have already happened is easy, and proving how they came to occur a lessor challenge than positively identifying what might happen amid the myriad of possibilities that exist ahead of time.

April/May 2019

Watch lists of possible perpetrators are kept, targets investigated and assessed, and a small number of individuals here have been intercepted probably prior to committing any serious crime. They have appeared in court on various lesser criminal charges. In preventing a grievous outcome however, is the elimination of any proof that any such thing would have happened. The success of our security sector will go unheralded here.

Watch lists work. But they do not work all the time. Most people on them never commit any crime; some do but are not stopped because the ‘flags’ just don’t fly high enough. Some, like the Orlando offender, are taken off watch lists and offend anyway. Others, like the Lindt Cafe perpetrator in Sydney, were actively being watched, but still their rapid decision to act caught police unawares.

On information available so far, the Christchurch perpetrator simply didn’t

April/May 2019

raise flags in Australia or New Zealand, has no criminal history, and many people who knew him saw no sign of his extremism. A number endorsed him in 2017 as a fit and proper person to hold a firearms license. He should have been on a watch list and he should have been stopped, but it’s the known outcome that now makes this obvious.... it’s a more difficult task when there hasn’t yet been an outcome.

Terrorist organisations with long term goals and plans to run campaigns of repeated violence generate logistical, communications and planning footprints.

Security agencies see the patterns and connections in these and can be in a position to counter them. Lone actors or small cells, with tight and small organisational networks, with the sole objective of carrying out just one attack, are far more difficult to see and identify.

It is more difficult to be sure about the need to interdict.

The Christchurch offender has not finished; he gave himself up. He wants the world stage a court room will give him. His trial must be full and fair, but to counter his terrorism it needs to be a closed court, without media to repeat and amplify his twisted message. I have deliberately not named him. I will not remember him or allow him ‘credit’ for what he did.

Over coming weeks and months we will look for answers in the fine detail, we look to identify whose responsibility it was to get in front of the Christchurch perpetrator and prevent him from committing his massacre of innocent people. Someone, or some security sector group, will be blamed perhaps, but ultimately we all share responsibility for this.

This article (and the article on Page 36-37) originally appeared in the Autumn 2019 issue of Line of Defence Magazine published by Defsec Media.

NZSM

33

CHRISTCHURCH

Interview: Countering violent extremism on the front foot John Borland, a former detective in the Queensland Police Intelligence, Counter-Terrorism and Major Events Command, suggests that a more proactive mindset is needed to manage the ongoing threat of violent extremism.

NZSM: Right-wing extremist terror attacks have been on the rise in the US and in Europe. Has New Zealand’s national security and law enforcement community been paying adequate attention to the right-wing threat?

JB: I think there should be as much focus on the issues within the country as there is focus on preventing risk later on, such at the border or incident response stage.

I haven’t had much involvement with the New Zealand counterterrorism measures other than what’s

publicly available, so I can’t factually say yes or no, but I think generally as a community we focus a lot more on the ‘risk’ from outside and tend to forget about the cancer already within the community.

From my experiences in the Queensland Police Counter Terrorism unit, I investigated as many cases for international risk as I did for ‘homegrown’ risk so I strongly believe the focus should be more reflective of this.

As a society we need to erase the white noise of these extremist attacks and look at the core issue which is poor mental health which is influenced by the internet.

NZSM: The Christchurch attack bears some similarities to the Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting of 27 October 2018 in the US. What similarities do you see with other recent attacks internationally?

John Borland of Auckland-based ISACORP which provides risk solutions for corporate and insurance enterprises

34

NZSM

JB: The use of firearms and the apparent retaliation on behalf of Europeans draws similarities. The government is now reacting to the shooting by foreshadowing a change to gun laws, which arguably should have been done in 2017 with the previous inquiry.

What is interesting about this shooting, having read the offender’s manifesto, is that this is one of only very few attacks I have studied that appears to involve a non-religious extremist ideology, as opposed to one based explicitly on religion.

NZSM: To what extent might there be an international dimension to this

incident, in terms of its motivation, conception, coordination, planning, preparation and execution?

JB: Having read the manifesto in its entirety, I have no doubt there is an international influence in relation to the offender’s mindset with respect to all of the above – even researching material on the internet provides this avenue for international influence. This unfortunately can’t be stopped, but it can be monitored appropriately by authorities.

As has been widely stated – the attack is similar to many of video games available on the internet, which raises questions around whether or not these games are normalising and influencing this sort of behaviour – especially when some gamers are now seen as celebrities and paid millions to promote such games.

Of the matters I investigated in Australia involving suspect radicals/ extremists, every case had an element of international influence – be it researching how to develop weaponry, brainstorming ideas with other ‘at risk’ persons, or obtaining chemicals to ship overseas.

NZSM: Online forums providing outlets for extremist ideologies and hate speech appear to play a role in attacks such as this. What possible mechanisms do the New Zealand government have in terms of enhanced monitoring and controls?

JB: Technology is our worst enemy and greatest weapon in the war against terrorism, there is no excuse for not

April/May 2019

having adequate screening processes and intel gathering strategies to identify persons ‘at risk’ of being involved in any violent ideologies. Data trails and social media make it easier than ever to gather credible Intel so if the government hasn’t implemented adequate CT strategies of this nature – the community should ask why not.

NZSM: In the wake of the attack, gun control has been raised as an area that needs tightening. Do you agree? To what extent can tighter gun control legislation have an impact given the existence of illegal avenues for the sourcing of weapons JB: Proper screening and justification for purchase of licences and firearms should be required like in Australia, as too the imposition of a gun register and weapons licensing audits. I am yet to be provided a solid case that supports the need for anyone to require military grade firearms for any purpose other than military purposes.

Having said this, however, no one can say that even if such controls had been in place this act of terrorism would have necessarily been avoided.

April/May 2019

NZSM: What are the key learnings the New Zealand Government should take away from the incident?

JB: The Terrorist Threat Level was set at ‘low’. Albeit with hindsight, it is difficult to justify this in 2019, particularly when taking into account factors such as online extremism, the epidemic of graphic video games – and their celebrity influencers – involving warfare and shootings, the prevalence of automatic weapons in New Zealand, and the increases in extremist attacks around the world involving mass shootings.

I would recommend that consideration be given to a simplification of terrorist threat levels to just ‘high risk’ and ‘unknown risk’. The ‘low’ risk level creates a false sense of security that suggests there is nothing to worry about.

Removing this connotation would help to ensure that as a community we always maintain vigilance.

NZSM: Looking ahead, how does this event change New Zealand’s threat landscape and security outlook?

JB: There needs to be more education around encouraging vigilance within the

community, and reporting any signs of risk of violence to authorities. Adequate internal procedures need to implemented (if not already) around scraping intel from the internet and verifying the intel that comes in.

Unfortunately, experience elsewhere shows that it tends to have to take a tragedy to occur before governments reactively implement such measures.

There needs to be a proactive mindset.

This may involve educating and awareness raising programmes encouraging the community to report suspicious activity, which may involve a creating a seamless online reporting platform, and establishing resources to develop intel and triage community reports.

Finally, the media should look to driving stories about the silver lining of this incident – by constantly pumping out articles such as ‘Muslims killed by white activist’ etc it only places his actions on a pedestal for others who will now likely worship him. It also assists the intent for which he committed the act. Stories relating to how New Zealand as a community has been outspoken and embracing of unity and multiculturalism stifles the terrorist agenda and disrupts their goal.

NZSM

35

CHRISTCHURCH

Interview: Call out extremist behaviour, define underpinning values Dr Richard Shortt, former Combined Threat Assessment Group manager (New Zealand Police/NZSIS) and national security policy advisor (DPMC), suggests the need for a circumspect response to extremism.

NZSM: There are reports that the perpetrator of the Christchurch mosque shootings had come to New Zealand for training and attack preparation. Is there a likelihood that New Zealand is harbouring terror support and training networks?

RS: New Zealand, as a liberal, western democracy has the potential to be misused in this way. We need only look back in the past decade to see at least one other occasion where NZ Police felt there was ‘training’ taking place and that people harboured unacceptable views, some would argue extreme views.

There was an outcry when this became public, rightly for the way the operation was handled in my view, but underlying it was a sinister commentary that was dismissed by some at the time as ‘that does not happen here’. I am

Dr Richard Shortt

36

NZSM

confident that New Zealand Police and NZSIS are constantly alert to the possibility (however remote) of support and training networks (or groups) and if information is supplied to either agency about such activity by concerned citizens it will be looked at appropriately.

I am confident that extremism, of whatever ideological background, is of concern to New Zealand’s security agencies. We have watched with interest the right wing activities overseas. Before 9/11 right-wing extremism and extreme nationalism was the primary threat in the US for law enforcement. Unfortunately, in more recent years we have seen this scourge spread further afield. Extremism is the threat.

NZSM: In the wake of the attack, gun control has been raised as an area that needs tightening. Do you agree? To what extent can tighter gun control legislation have an impact given the existence of illegal avenues for the sourcing of weapons RS: Guns in the wrong hands are a lethal mix. No amount of legislation will remove all of the risk associated with the presence and legitimate use of firearms in society.

However, like the shootings at Aromoana, these recent tragic events present a further opportunity to review the legislation in New Zealand and to determine if it still adequately balances access to firearms by sporting and recreational users and the ability to keep society safe from those who would seek to

use firearms for evil. The types of firearms available, the capacity of magazines, the sale of ammunition and the vetting of licence holders (both when applying for a licence and during the life of the licence) will all no doubt be looked at.

NZSM: Online forums providing outlets for extremist ideologies and hate speech appear to play a role in attacks such as this. What possible mechanisms do the New Zealand government have in terms of enhanced monitoring and controls?

RS: I am confident that both Police and NZSIS are aware of the online sites involved and seek, within the law as it stands, to monitor their use. They provide an opportunity to identify individuals of security concern through the ‘telescoping’ of a person’s extreme views and possibly their intentions and capabilities.

But, saying things online may not be sufficient to put a person into a security case file and to warrant resources to further check on them, or to surveil their activity. The bar for that is high, as it should be. I am sure questions will be asked about how effective our current monitoring of social media is, and whether the current legislative arrangements permit appropriate oversight by security agencies.

NZSM: Is the New Zealand Police and intelligence agencies adequately resourced and structured to focus on the identification and monitoring of fixated persons?

April/May 2019

RS: The agencies themselves will need to answer this question. However, as with all government agencies in small countries the funding of activities is always dependant on proved need, political policy settings and just how much funding is available to cover all of the country’s needs. Our resources in NZ are not limitless and need to be allocated carefully.

I suspect in the wake of this tragedy security agencies will be asked to submit additional funding bids through the coordinating agencies like DPMC for consideration by Government. They will also be asked to comment on their current legislative settings and to advise if any of these need review or modification in light of what we discover about the events leading up to these tragic attacks.

appropriately, are working well together to manage and mitigate risk, and, finally, that even with the best professionals, funding and management there remains a residual risk that an individual or small group can perpetrate evil without warning. That’s not an ‘intelligence failure’ necessarily, that’s just reality.

Arising from the above is the need to ensure we have comprehensive understanding of how to build a resilient society that does not ‘knee-jerk’ out of fear or horror, and which can continue to focus on its values and beliefs.

Perhaps in New Zealand we need more public discussion of what our society’s underpinning values and beliefs are so that in times of upheaval we can be reminded of them rather than letting emotion and distress drive us.

NZSM: What are the key learnings the New Zealand Government should take away from the mass killing in Christchurch?

NZSM: Looking ahead, how does this event change New Zealand’s threat landscape and security outlook?

RS: For me they are: we are not immune from some of the terrible acts we see perpetrated in other parts of the world; we need to ensure, within reason, that our security agencies are funded

April/May 2019

RS: We have had a powerful and horrible reminder of the evils of extremism. The threat landscape continues to be one where extreme views of all types, hues and persuasions need to be watched with caution. A spirited democratic country

can and should have debates about social issues and politics, but the extremists amongst us need to be a focus of security attention.

We have had through our history a number of criminal and now terrorist outrages, these should just remind us all that a well-resourced, well led and lawfully guided security regime is necessary in today’s world. Some who decry NZSIS and the GCSB (and to a lesser extent NZ Police) may now wish to pause and reflect on their positions.

We should also be reminded that every citizen bears a responsibility to call out extremist language and behaviour, and to report concerns to authorities so an assessment can be made of the threat they may represent.

New Zealand is a resilient country.

We will rebound from this and be, I trust, stronger for it. We should debate our national values and beliefs to better understand what it is we pride ourselves in as New Zealanders and that we will not tolerate being attacked. These are what make us Kiwis and what should help to steady us in times like this when people try and divide us, to shock us or to drive us towards actions that are not supported by those values and beliefs.

NZSM

37

Terrorism: Less lethal, more universal According to the Global Terrorism Index, the threat of far-right terrorism is on the rise. Far-right groups and individuals accounted for nearly 60 percent of extremist-related deaths in the U.S. in 2017, writes Lilly Chapa in Security Management.

The continuing decline of ISIS in Iraq and Syria, combined with an increased emphasis on counterterrorism worldwide, has paid off: deaths from terrorism fell for the third consecutive year in 2017, and the trend is expected to continue.

That’s according to the latest Global Terrorism Index, which is released annually by the Institute for Economics and Peace based on data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) Global Terrorism Database.

While ISIS’s clout has diminished in Europe, Iraq, and Syria—the number of deaths caused by the organisation fell by 52 percent overall, dropping 75 percent in Europe alone—it remained the deadliest terrorist group in 2017. Its spread to North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia is ongoing.

While Europe saw the biggest reduction in deaths from attacks in 2017, the number of terrorist incidents increased. According to the report, this highlights ISIS’s reduced capacity to plan and coordinate larger scale attacks.

Meanwhile, North America saw the largest increase in the impact of terrorism from 2016 to 2017, with the majority of terrorist activity taking place in the United States. This is the fourth successive year that terrorist-related deaths have risen in the region, from 65 in 2016 to 85 in 2017.

This is also the first year the report has distinguished far-right wing terrorism as a growing trend—white power extremists were responsible for nine attacks and seven deaths in North America in 2017, the report notes. This trend is expected to continue, based on

38

NZSM

the October 2018 attack on a Pittsburgh synagogue that left 11 people dead.

“The threat of far-right political terrorism is on the rise,” according to the report. “There were 66 deaths from terrorism caused by far-right groups and individuals from 113 attacks for the years from 2013 to 2017. Of those, 17 deaths and 47 attacks occurred in 2017 alone.

In Western Europe, there were 12 attacks in the U.K., six in Sweden, and two each in Greece and France.

In the U.S., there were 30 attacks in 2017 which resulted in 16 deaths. The majority of attacks were carried out by lone actors with far-right, white nationalist, or anti-Muslim beliefs.”

Far-right groups and individuals accounted for nearly 60 percent of extremist-related American deaths in 2017, the report later notes.

It’s important to put reports like the Global Terrorism Index in context, emphasises Michael Center, vice chair for subject matter experts and growth with the ASIS International Global Terrorism, Political Instability, and International Crime Council. When it comes to defining and quantifying terrorism trends, digging into the data to understand who committed attacks and what their motivations were can be enlightening.

“The report wrapped all forms of terrorism into one statistic—it makes the problem look bigger than it is,” Center, a western Europe security advisor based in Brussels, tells Security Management.

“Especially in the United States, if you use the word ‘terrorism,’ you’re really talking about Islamic terrorism. When the report talks about the number of incidents in the United States, that includes groups like anti-Semitics, leftwing radicals, and white supremacists, all of whom outnumber Islamists these days.

While the report defines the different groups, it doesn’t break down what those numbers are.”

One trend the report focuses on is the high rate of terrorism in countries classified as being “in conflict”—they had at least one conflict which led to 25 or more battle-related deaths. There is a correlation between battle-related deaths and deaths from terrorism, the report found—in 2017, almost 95 percent of total deaths from terrorism occurred in countries involved in violent conflict. Additionally, just 10 countries accounted for 84 percent of all deaths from terrorism in 2017, and all 10 of those countries were classified as being in conflict.

Center notes that it can be hard to distinguish terrorism from insurgency in such situations, especially depending on how terrorist acts are defined.

“In a country that’s going through conflict, if you have a conflict death as the result of violence due to wanting to create and instill fear for political gain, that’s a real gray area,” Center says. “Is it terrorism or insurgency? If I want to be a purist, and I’m looking at Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan, these are open conflict countries and the parties involved are all fighting with each other. Is that really terrorism?”

Much of the report focuses on emerging trends gleaned from the START database, including the ongoing spread of terrorism activity. Despite the decline in terror-related deaths, 2017 saw the second-highest number of countries affected by lethal terror attacks. This is evident by the ongoing decentralisation of terror groups, as well as the spread of terror activity into areas such as Africa’s Maghreb and Sahel regions, Southeast Asia, and Nigeria’s Middle Belt.

April/May 2019

on

e c u r i ty I

ar

Z

S ’s

mited 30 y Li e

nd

Loktr

ic

y tr s u

ss

ervicing

N

Loktronic for Electric Locking Hardware and Accessories

Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK mail@loktronic.co.nz www.loktronic.co.nz

The report also mentions ongoing speculation about the threat of the estimated 40,000 radicalised foreign fighters who travelled to Iraq and Syria to aid ISIS. “While thousands of foreign fight­ers have returned to their home countries and even more are expected to do so over the next year, the threat of battlehardened and skilled returnees carrying out terrorist attacks remains a serious security concern,” the report states.

Indeed, from 2014 to 2017, an estimated 18 percent of terror attacks in the West were carried out by returned foreign fighters, according to the report.

“The topic of returning foreign fighters is complex, and it’s still being studied, but among the people I deal with, there’s not that much talk about them anymore because they’ve mostly returned and entered judicial systems,” Center points out. “They’re not just sitting around without being observed.”

He does note that many Russian-­ speaking foreign fighters have been able to return home more easily—and covertly—than fighters from other

European countries. “People should be looking at former Soviet satellite countries for future moves—terrorists will start emerging from that area more,” Center predicts.

The report also focuses on the nexus between crime and terrorism, especially when it comes to recruiting and radicalisation in Western Europe. While conflict remains the primary driver of terrorism in most areas, countries with high levels of economic development are impacted by terrorism for different reasons: social alienation, lack of economic opportunity, and involvement in an external conflict.

These hallmarks can lead to an affinity between disgruntled outsiders and jihadist groups and ideologies.

Additionally, the report repeatedly cites studies finding that, in Western Europe, more than 40 percent of foreign fighters and those arrested for terrorist activity have some form of criminal background.

“It is difficult to know whether individuals with a criminal background are being deliberately targeted by

terrorist recruiters,” the report states.

“However, there is little doubt that there is considerable synergy between the needs of disaffected young criminals, and the needs of terrorist organisations.”

Center says the latent radicalised population in Europe is something that existed before ISIS and will continue to exist—the question is whether individuals will feel empowered to act.

“In Europe, you have a population of radicalised Muslims—just like you have people in the Ozarks in middle America who have a firm foundational version of their Christian beliefs—technically they are radicals within that population, but not all radicals are prepared to kill people,” Center explains.

“Even though ISIS came and went, the radicalised population in Europe has not changed—they still exist, but nobody is talking about their motivation. Let’s say you have 10 radicalised people, and out of that 10, only one would be prepared to kill people. But given the fall of the ISIS caliphate, is that one person still prepared to fight? To kill?”

© 2019 ASIS International, 1625 Prince Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. Reprinted with permission from the March 2019 issue of Security Management.

40

NZSM

April/May 2019

Women in Security 3rd May 2019 Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa

A must-attend New Zealand security sector event Key note speakers, Bonnie Butlin and Grant Lecky CSyP, CBCP, CMCP, CORP are joined by leaders from the New Zealand Cyber, Defence and Government sectors.

Sponsorship opportunities are now available.

Visit www.asis.org.nz for the prospectus or contact secretary@asis.org.nz.

Don’t miss out on the opportunity to support the advancement of the New Zealand security sector and to connect with the Pacific’s top security leaders and influencers.

This event has limited spaces. Please register to attend via Eventbrite.

Principal sponsor

Converged Security Provider

The benefits of being smart As more and more cities look to become ‘smart’, there are opportunities for security providers who are prepared to innovate and to deliver more than just security outcomes, writes Ginger Schlueter in Security Technology.

Dubai is on a mission. It wants to become the world’s smartest city by 2021 and has more than 545 initiatives in the works to fundamentally change the way people experience the city.

The effort is part of Dubai’s Smart City strategy, which launched in 2014, according to Visit Dubai.

“Key strategic goals include: transforming more than 100 essential government services into smart services carried out primarily online; introducing autonomous vehicles and smart transportation services; providing free, high-speed Wi-Fi across the emirate; and developing a data-driven economy that authorities estimate will generate an additional AED 10.4 billion (U.S. $2.83 billion) in GDP by 2021,” a press release explained.

“The Smart Dubai Platform will be unlike any other smart city platform operating in the world today,” said Her Excellency Dr. Aisha Bin Bishr, director general of the Smart Dubai Office, which is rolling out the Smart City strategy.

And Dubai is not alone. Cities around the world want to provide residents and visitors with greater access and connections via technology as more people begin to migrate to urban areas.

The United Nations projects that 68 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas by 2050, and that more than 60 percent of the land projected to become urban has yet to be developed. This creates an opportunity for the security industry to provide the safety and security segment smart cities need.

Smart Cities 101 There are varying definitions of a smart city, but they share many similarities. Smart cities are sustainable, both environmentally and economically; proactive in detecting

42

NZSM

threats; able to break down big data gathered from devices throughout the city into understandable, usable information; livable for people; and utilize connected components.

“The motive right now of smart cities is the ability to manage a city based upon the interconnectivity of traffic control, emergency systems, video infrastructure—in terms of tracking incidents and potential threats—and parking management and controls,” says Pierre Bourgeix, consulting manager at Boon Edam.

To make this possible, cities must invest in a robust infrastructure to support the technology they’re installing.

“Smart grids, together with fixed broadband infrastructure based on 5G and Fixed Wireless Access— essentially fiber optic performance in a wireless transport medium—are some key elements providing the underlying infrastructure to advance smart cities,” says Steve Surfaro, a physical and cybersecurity solutions expert and member of the ASIS International Security and Applied Sciences Ad Hoc Council.

In one of its smart city initiatives, Dubai is using artificial intelligence-driven robots to assist tourists by answering their questions, providing directions, and more. Dubai is also looking into creating an “autonomous police station” controlled by a mobile app to assist its police department.

“Some countries and cities—Dubai, Kuwait, India, Singapore, and China—are way ahead of the curve,” explains Jumbi Edulbehram, regional president Americas at Oncam Grandeye. “China especially has a ton of smart city technology, including a whole highway that can power cars as they are driving on top of it.”

The United States lags behind many nations when it comes to smart city development. However, this gives the United States a chance to look at successfully functioning smart cities and reproduce similar applications.

April/May 2019

“The United States is starting to see how new technologies are being birthed with smart cities,” Bourgeix says. “We see the advancement of…lighting, infrastructure solutions, etc., so we already know what the U.S.’s future looks like and we’re preparing by installing wide area networks and 5G infrastructure.”

Smart city trends While cities adopt technology to improve transportation and efficiency, areas of smart city development offer the security industry the opportunity to play a vital role. And the industry is beginning to step up.

“The big camera players, for example, all started a smart cities division and hired—or are still hiring—smart city business development personnel to go out into the market,” Edulbehram says. “And security associations are starting smart city committees to help investigate all the intersections between safe and smart cities.”

Biometric technologies will also further enhance the smart cities of the future, implemented into access control applications and others.

“We are already starting to see currency as ‘you,’” Bourgeix says. “Eventually, you won’t need a [credit card] anymore…your face…your biometric authentication will be enough to make a purchase.”

The rapid growth of smart city concepts and the innovation of technologies to operate them present the security industry with opportunities.

“I am currently talking to a lighting company that has been selling lights with this communication hub and a processing bar for a few years,” Edulbehram says. “The company is looking for ways to provide value-added services on top of just selling lights.

It wants to incorporate video cameras into the actual lights, along with other sensors—like gun-shot and weather detection.”

Smart cities will also look to the security industry to help secure the data collected and transmitted through all this interconnectivity.

One example of the serious ramifications of unprotected data occurred in 2017 in Dallas, Texas. Hackers used a rogue radio signal to set off tornado sirens around the city, which could have caused a panic. Dallas officials have since made changes to the system to prevent similar attacks in the future.

“Secured communication must happen, and we’re heading in that direction with secured identity, secured entry, and secured storage,” Bourgeix explains. “This is critical to the success of smart cities; we have these wonderful devices and they’re connected, but we must secure it. If not, they become our weakest link.”

However, most cities will consider addressing these challenges with tighter budgets than in the past. One way to secure funding, says Janet Fenner, chief marketing officer at ISS, is to incorporate security technologies for other uses.

For example, in 2016 Detroit installed high-definition security cameras at eight gas stations the city had partnered with and connected the video feeds to the Detroit Police Department, blending public and private interests into real-time crime fighting.

Two years later, the program expanded to more than 400 businesses feeding video directly into the police department’s Real-Time Crime Center where dedicated staff receive, monitor, and analyze the feeds.

Such initiatives simultaneously enhance public safety and help business owners and operators keep their facilities secure.

They will become more prevalent in the future and are the best way to secure funding for new technology.

“Overall, law enforcement needs to start working more effectively and efficiently with others within the city,” says Fenner. “The more [the city as a whole] pools its resources together, the better protected it is.”

© 2019 ASIS International, 1625 Prince Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. Reprinted with permission from the March 2019 issue of Security Technolog y.

April/May 2019

NZSM

43

Loktronic

Power

distribution module

key switches Two functions are available Momentary or maintained contact (specify when ordering) Switch rated at 6A @ 28 VDC Supplied random keyed Re-key or master key at any locksmith Front or rear fixing

Loktronic

for gate locks

For the widest range range of applications, see our IP67 rated Loktronic and Loktrenz electromagnetic locks with optional brackets to make fitting a breeze.

Applications Access control, air-conditioning, lifts, lighting etc

•D

in N Z •

Lo

ic Prod ron uc

Designed, tested and produced in New Zealand.

Designed, tested and produced in New Zealand.

ts

kt

Key switch supplied loose Mounting bracket Escutcheon Mounted on PDL plate with alloy cover

Comprises • DPDT 12 or 24 VDC Fire Drop Relay • 6, 8 or 10 fused terminals with LED • 2 Red Terminals • 2 Black Terminals • Assembled on DIN Rail • All Terminals Labelled

New options with this versatile product

We have strikes by FSH and eff-eff, Rim locks by CISA, plus specialty roller door locks.

Outdoor and Gate Locks from Loktronic - a smart choice.

This 6, 8 or 10 way Power Distribution Module will drop power to a group of doors when signaled by a fire alarm and has individual fused power supply to each lock. LED lights when fuse fails.

Red and black terminals distribute from PSU or battery to load.

,T

es

uc

ed

e s i gned

and Pr od ted

R

R

ISO 9001:2015

R

ISO 9001:2015

REGISTERED COMPANY

ISO 9001:2015

REGISTERED COMPANY

Certificate No. NZ1043

REGISTERED COMPANY

Certificate No. NZ1043

Certificate No. NZ1043

Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz 21636.KS.2018

Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz 20756_BP.2018

ALLIANCE Wholesale

ICTS e &cSecurity ICT & u r i t y – –ffrom r o m Entry E n t r ytotEnterprise o Enterprise

Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz 20239.2018

CCTV – Alarms – Access – Intercoms

0800 AWL NZL

Power supply cabinets • Mounts for our 5 most popular models of power supplies; 6 key-hole anchor points for easier mounting • Lift off hinged doors for added convenience

total reed switch

• Louvre ventilation on doors • Roller ball reed switch provides anti-tamper to front and rear of cabinet

solutions from Flair

• 6 x 25mm knockouts, 2 each sides and bottom • Medium cabinet holds 5 x 7 A/h batteries

Choose from Closed Circuit or SPDT. Listed options will suit Standard doors, Steel doors, Roller doors

• Large cabinet holds 14 x 7 A/h batteries • Cam lock for security • Front lip to retain batteries and for additional strength

• Lip return on door for greater rigidity ic Prod ron uc

in N Z •

•D

,T

es

uc

ed

e s i gned

and Pr od ted

Designed, tested and produced in New Zealand.

kt

ts

• Heavy gauge 1.2mm steel

Lo

• Durable powder coated white finish

for power supplies

Specials available to order.

With 30 models in stock, make Loktronic your go-to supplier. Fully monitored Powerbox brand security PSUs in 12 VDC from 3.5 A to 20 A and 24 VDC units from 5 A to 12 A. We have Meanwell DIN rail PSUs in 12 & 24 VDC from 20 - 100 watts, with optional battery charging.

Inline, Plug packs and DC/DC converters round out this great range.

Flair reeds from Loktronic: an unbeatable combination.

Power supplies from Loktronic – a Powerful Deal.

• Surface mount • Press fit • Self adhesive tape or screw mounting • Flying leads or screw terminals • Standard and wide gap • Stubbies • Mini flange • Sub miniatures • Pull aparts • Clamp ons • Overhead doors with offsets

• Removable shelf and removable back plate to facilitate easy bench mounting of equipment

Loktronic

R

ISO 9001:2015

REGISTERED COMPANY

Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz

20238_PSC

Certificate No. NZ1043

Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz 20237.FL.2018

R

ISO 9001:2015

REGISTERED COMPANY Certificate No. NZ1043

Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK www.loktronic.co.nz 20757_BP.2018

Wireless IP Surveillance

Customized CCTV Kits Kits Dahua Customized

Open Platform VMS

• Cost effective high performance wireless access points for outdoor use • Stockists of AirMax, AirFiber, AirVision, UniFI & mFi series products • ITPLUS are a Ubiquiti certified and trained partner

• We supply fully customized supply fully customized • We complete CCTV kits in form of complete CCTV kits in form of Hybrid, Tribrid, IP Hybrid, Tribrid, IP, , CVI etc CVI etc • Complete kits are a great way of • Complete kits are a great way of reducing costs and getting the reducing costs and getting the whole package from one place whole package from one place • Receive FREE support* Receive FREE support* including including remote connection • remote connection assistance assistance

• Award winning best open platform VMS • Advanced Built-in Video Analytics • Micromodule crashproof software architecture • Includes powerful features such as Modern GUI, Video Archive, Green Stream, Time Compressor, Interactive 3D Map, Autozoom etc.

Distributed by

Distributed by

Distributed by

Ph: 09 950 4940 l E: info@itplus.co.nz www.itplus.co.nz

Ph: 09 950 4940 l E: info@itplus.co.nz www.itplus.co.nz

Ph: 09 950 4940 l E: info@itplus.co.nz www.itplus.co.nz

ALLIANCE Wholesale

L • 8A Triton Drive, Albany, Auckland • sales@AWLNZ.com

IPC3615 5MP Turret

I C T & S e c u r iwww.AWLNZ.com ty – from Entry to Enterprise

IPC2325 5MP Bullet

IPC868 4k Fisheye

5MP 2592 x 1944 @ 20 fps

5MP 2592 x 1944 @ 20 fps

12MP 4000 x 3000 @ 15 fps

2.8mm AF lens (105deg view)

2.7~13.5mm AF lens

Ultrawide 360deg view

SmartIR, up to 30 m

SmartIR, up to 50 m

SmartIR, up to 10 m

Onboard Mic

Storage up to 128GB

Onboard Mic/speaker

Onboard Analytics

Onboard Analytics

Storage up to 128GB

IP67

IP67

Onboard Analytics IP66

ph: 09 276 3271 sales@crknz.co.nz

ph: 09 276 3271 sales@crknz.co.nz

ph: 09 276 3271 sales@crknz.co.nz

3 Hotunui Drive Mt Wellington, Auckland, 1060

3 Hotunui Drive Mt Wellington, Auckland, 1060

3 Hotunui Drive Mt Wellington, Auckland, 1060

SUBSCRIBE Readers of NZ Security include those working directly and indirectly in the domestic and commercial security industry. From business owners and managers right through to suppliers, installers and front line staff.

Among our readers are IT security experts, surveillance professionals and loss prevention staff.

Our readers take their job seriously and make an active choice to be kept informed and up to date with the industry.

For only $75.00 plus GST you can ensure that you receive a 1 year subscription (6 issues) by filling out the form below and posting to: New Zealand Security Magazine 27 West Cresent, Te Puru, 3575 RD5, Thames, New Zealand or email your contact and postal details to: craig@defsec.net.nz Mr Mrs Ms________________________ Surname_________________________ Title_____________________________ Company________________________ Postal Address____________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ Telephone________________________ Email____________________________ Date_____________________________ Signed___________________________

NZSM New Zealand Security Magazine

46

NZSM

EVENTS Milipol Asia-Pacific 2019 When: 2-4 April 2019 Where: Marina Bay Sands, Singapore www.milipolasiapacific.com ISC West 2019 When: 10-12 April 2019 Where: Las Vegas, United States www.iscwest.com ASIS NZ Women in Security When: 03 May 2019 Where: Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington www.asis.org.nz Secutech When: 8-10 May 2019 Where: Taipei, Taiwan www.secutech.tw.messefrankfurt.com/ taipei/en/ Behavioural Analysis 2019 When: 21-23 May 2019 Where: Mall of America, Minneapolis, USA www.behaviouralanalysis.com Biometrics Institute Asia-Pacific Conference When: 22-23 May 2019 Where: Dockside Sydney Australia www.biometricsinstitute.org

NZ Security Awards 2019 When: 23 August 2019 Where: Crowne Plaza, Auckland www.security.org.nz/events/nz-securityawards/ ASIS Global Security Exchange 2019 When: 8-12 September Where: Chicago, Illinois, USA www.gsx.org/event-info/future-dates/ Facilities Integrate 2019 When: 25 - 26 September 2019 Where: ASB Showgrounds, Auckland www.northportevents.nz/events/facilitiesintegrate/ 2019 NZ Cyber Security Summit When: 15 October 2019 Where: Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington www.conferenz.co.nz/events/2019-nzcyber-security-summit NZSA Regional Visits 08-09 April - Rotorua/ Taupo 14-15 May - Hawkes Bay 12-14 June - Taranaki/ Manawatu 09-10 July - Christchurch 11-13 September - Southland 08 - 09 October - Nelson/ Blenheim Email gary@security.org.nz

Interpol World 2019 When: 2-4 July 2019 Where: Sands Expo & Convention Centre, Singapore www.interpol-world.com India Homeland Security Expo When: 19-20 July 2019 Where: New Delhi, India www.homelandsecurityexpo.in 2019 Security Exhibition & Conference When: 24-26 July 2019 Where: Sydney, Australia www.asial.com.au/events/category/ security-conference-exhibition

April/May 2019

on

e c u r i ty I Z

S ’s

ss

ervicing

N Loktronic Limited Unit 7 19 Edwin Street Mt Eden Auckland P O Box 8329 Symonds Street Auckland 1150 New Zealand Ph 64 9 623 3919 Fax 64 9 623 3881 0800 FOR LOK mail@loktronic.co.nz www.loktronic.co.nz

ar

Loktronic for Fire Protection Products

mited 30 y Li e

nd

Loktr

ic

y tr s u

Š 2018 Genetec Inc. GENETEC and the GENETEC LOGO are trademarks of Genetec Inc., and may be registered or pending registration in several jurisdictions.

Š 2018 Genetec Inc. GENETEC and the GENETEC LOGO are trademarks of Genetec Inc., and may be registered or pending registration in several jurisdictions.

Start seeingthe the bigger Start seeing biggerpicture. picture.

Get a more complete understanding of your organization with Genetec Security Center. It unifies our

threecomplete core systems of video surveillance, control, and automatic number plateCenter. recognition in Get a more understanding of youraccess organization with Genetec Security It unifies our single comprehensive platform.

Simplifyaccess your operations a clearer view with Security Center. three acore systems of video surveillance, control,and andget automatic number plate recognition in HSS0030-Mar19-V2 a single comprehensive platform. Simplify your operations and get a clearer view with Security Center.

Find out about Security Center from our trusted partner at hills.com.au

For more information on these and other best-in-class solutions

Find out about Security Center from our trusted partner at hills.com.au

from Hills call us on 0800 1 HILLS (44557) or visit hills.co.nz

facebook.com/HillsLtd/ CONNECT

E N T E RTA I N

SECURE