6 minute read
Industrial
Industrial
Told to front for an ICAC or IIS interview? Don’t be bullied
SA police officers choose to belong to the Police Association. There are many good reasons for that – and they know it. Just under 99 per cent of sworn officers are savvy enough to have worked it out.
Another issue about which they have to be savvy is the prospect of an ICAC or IIS investigation. When members realize they have full association support in these cases, the relief on their faces or in their voices is a reward in itself.
First, members should always contact the association after one of these agencies has contacted them.
Whether, during an investigation, you undergo an interview or provide a statement, as either a subject or a witness, you should take the matter very seriously.
When members contact the association for its support with their response to a pending ICAC or IIS investigation, I begin by providing a detailed list of pointers. 1. If you who receive phone contact from a person who claims to be from the ICAC or IIS, do not engage in any conversation without first verifying the identity of that person. This cannot be achieved over the phone.
Request e-mail verification of the identity of any person who enquires about an incident or a conduct matter. 2. Insist that the investigator confirm whether he or she is directing you to attend an interview or whether it is your choice to attend. As soon as the investigator activates the recording equipment, and before the interview or statement begins, ask him or her to indicate the act under which he or she is interviewing you.
3. If you attend an interview involuntarily and are only providing answers under duress, advise the investigator of that fact – when recording equipment is activated.
Indicate that you have been directed to attend and provide information, either in an interview or by providing a statement. 4. Do not be comforted by assurances that you are “only a witness”. These matters can, and do, easily change, depending on the information you provide. 5. As soon as the investigator activates the recording equipment, and before the interview or statement begins, ask him or her to indicate the act under which he or she is interviewing you. 6. Ask the investigator to outline your obligations in respect of answering his or her questions under the particular act. Ask this question whether you are there as the subject of an interview or a witness for a statement. This is important if you are required to provide an affidavit as there is no power to require you to swear or affirm an affidavit. 7. Always record the interview or statement on your own device (not a SAPOL device). This ensures that if any information is taken out of context, and then appears to have a meaning other than the one you intended, it can be raised later and corrected. 8. You should always advise the investigator that you wish to record the interview/conversation. If your request is denied, ensure that fact is recorded on the investigator’s device. 9. If the investigator prevents you, either purposely or inadvertently, from completing any of your answers, advise him or her immediately, or certainly before answering the next question. This will ensure that you do not provide an answer with the potential to mislead or create a misunderstanding. 10.Take all relevant documentation – such as general orders, policies and legislation – with you to the interview/ statement. No interview should morph into a test of your knowledge of the copious information contained in policies, general orders or legislation. And, in any case, the stress of an interview can impact on your ability to recall written information. 11. Ask to refer to your general orders or other documents if an investigator asks you a knowledge question pertaining to such documents. 12.In respect of your involvement in an incident, you might want to access and refer to SAPOL records, such as charge records, investigation diaries,
CCTV/BWV, notes or arrest files. If you do want to do that, seek permission of the investigator so as not to breach any policy or act. Continued page 39
Steve Whetton Member Liaison Officer Police Association
Clear need to redefine regional/outer metro areas
South Australia Police released consultation paper Regional Review – Regional Policing Model to the workforce in February 2020.
The model sets out to provide a “scalable, consistent framework for regional policing” and is a “blueprint for incremental change to regional policing over the next 10-20 years”.
In its Workplace Planning Guide, under Workplace planning explained, the Australian Public Service Commission indicates that strategic workforce plans usually cover a three- to five-year forecast period, and have five key benefit categories: • Increased public value. • Financial (value for money). • Improved business outcomes. • Increased capability/capacity. • Improved decision-making.
Key points repeated in this guide are: • Meeting welfare needs. • The delivery of service to the community. • Meeting citizen demands. • Building trust.
These points come with competing financial objectives which are aligned with a budget statement.
In respect of the consultation paper, the opportunity exists to ensure the model reflects the expectations of the community, with country staffing aligned to the population increase.
The metropolitan district policing model commenced in 2018 and combined six local service areas into four districts: southern, northern, western, and eastern.
The regional review model combines seven country local service areas into six regions, each of which is separated into districts.
The terminology differs between country and metropolitan policing but is purely administrative.
The most significant change is the regional area Outer Metro Region. It encompasses the previous Barossa and Hills Fleurieu local service areas, which includes Kangaroo Island.
Outer Metro Region will encompass the Barossa, Adelaide Hills, and Fleurieu districts and have a structure similar to those of other regions.
It will cover Kangaroo Island, Victor Harbor, Echunga, Strathalbyn, Kapunda, Dublin and Truro, as well as areas defined as regional: Stirling, Mount Barker and Gawler.
From a strategic, organizational perspective, SAPOL need consider redefining regional/outer metro areas – such as Mount Barker, Stirling and Gawler – as metropolitan.
This is clearly necessary given that the regional review model highlighted that the current Barossa and Hills Fleurieu local service areas “continue to grow and place significant demand on police resources”.
The proposed reduction in training facilitators will result in an over-reliance on training based on IT programmes. The Police Association has heard directly from members in the proposed outer region. They have expressed concern about the delivery of juvenile justice programmes, intelligence gathering, and community programmes in such an expansive region.
Modern, progressive societies exist in an environment of ever-changing legislation, policies and procedures, which demands communication and consultation.
Implementing online rather than face-to-face training results essentially from financial considerations. But section 5 of the Police Act demands that members be fully proficient and have all resources – including the guidance of training facilitators – available to them.
The Police Association has heard directly from members in the proposed outer region. They have expressed concern about the delivery of juvenile justice programmes, intelligence gathering, and community programmes in such an expansive region.
Exacerbating their concerns is that the specific substantive positions/roles in the proposed model have been reduced and/or the area of responsibility expanded.
Of immediate concern is the proposed transfer of functions to the front-line response, where patrol officers are to be allocated community engagement activities and juvenile justice functions.
An article (Does multiskilling in service management lead to improved job satisfaction?) on website Service Futures identifies that multi-skilling of employees has significant financial benefits to employers. This is because it enables employees to perform functions previously undertaken across separate positions.
Multi-skilling has its benefits. The concern, however, is that while specialist front-line members meet the demand to become multi-skilled, the juvenile justice and community programme functions will be devalued.
