Opinion
How a ‘Dad’s Army’ of experts could help Victoria’s youth crime problem
Neil Mitchell
JournalistModern government is less about ideas and solutions, and more about hosing down political bushfires, spinning sludge into silk, and pretending the sun doesn’t rise in the east.
For those reasons, the words that follow are probably wasted. It’s an idea, and the problem is juvenile crime.
The community is rattled by the level of youth crime.
You can debate trends and individual risks, but offences committed by those under 17 are increasing and becoming more violent.
Experienced police say that previously, 15 and 16-year-olds began shoplifting and progressed to car theft and violence. Now, children as young as 12 and 13 years old jump the minor stuff, grab machetes, burst into houses in the middle of the night, steal cars and evade police at speeds that would make racing drivers pale.
The community is rattled.
It is not only law and order lobbyists shouting. Last week, retired Supreme Court judge Lex Lasry told me that juvenile crime figures were “horrifying”, and that society is becoming more violent.
The “crisis” has been escalating for years. But as Annika Smethurst reported in this masthead, the penny has only now dropped with the Victorian state government that this is dangerous, and not so much because of concern for the public, but concern about voter backlash.
Recent history suggests that will mean a brace of photo opportunities, another pre-scripted talkfest, and many press releases pretending they’re getting somewhere. Expect window dressing, not answers.
There is another option. What is needed is freshness, independent lateral thinking from experienced people who care about the community, the justice system, and the kids at the heart of this.
So to the idea: Establish a “Dad’s Army” of experts drawn from the talented pool of people sitting in this state waiting to be “exploited”. Mobilise the good-hearted and experienced among them into a panel with the brief to explore juvenile crime and possible answers.
The panel should dig where it finds need, exploring areas linked to juvenile crime like parental responsibility, the influence of social media and video games, suburban links, ethnic links, gang structures, bail, electronic monitoring, penalties, the role of the courts and social workers. Review other countries. Has anybody found anything approaching an answer?
This may be the media kiss of death, but this is who we need:
Lex Lasry, the former judge quoted earlier, has been around criminals for 50 years. He has sentenced some of our worst murderers. He finessed a system of judicial accountability for children on bail, where they reported to him weekly for an assessment of their behaviour. And he wants to work.
Deborah Glass, the former Victorian ombudsman, knows how to navigate the bureaucratic system. In the UK, she was an independent custody visitor, and commissioner of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. She was involved in many high-profile investigations and received an OBE in thanks.
Glass has a crusader’s heart, dedicated to fairness. She showed as ombudsman she would not be intimidated by bullying politicians. And she wants to work.
Ken Lay, the former chief commissioner, was an operational policeman, has broad contacts across the force and deep experience as a leader. Though he’s probably bruised by his treatment during the inquiry into safe injecting rooms, and may be more interested in golf than crime.
If that’s the case, consider Greg Davies, also a former operational policeman, and former head of the Police Association and the victims of crime commissioner. He has been fiercely independent of government, and victims must feel abandoned since he stepped down.
Bernie Geary, the former Victorian commissioner for children and young people, was Victoria’s first outreach worker, was on the youth parole board, the premier’s drug advisory council, the sentencing advisory council, and the Victorian Children’s Council. His qualifications are impeccable, and he is one of the most caring souls you would meet in any system.
Each nominee here has the ability to ring well-placed people in police, the courts and social welfare and invite them to chat and have their brains picked.
It would not be a royal commission or a judicial inquiry demanding millions of dollars and 50-volume reports. It does not need formality. Call it a think tank, or the premier’s special advisory council or (unkindly) the Dad’s Army of crime prevention. It doesn’t matter.
If my argument could provoke even a little different thinking it has been worth the words.
There are decent, compassionate, experienced people ready to be challenged to produce an informed burst of lateral thinking.
But inevitably, there’s a problem. Such a panel would produce ideas, and governments usually only ask questions when they already know the answer.
The premier has already blinked on the absurd cuts to hospital funding. The new challenge she flounders with — in addition to a lack of authority and deteriorating polls — is to put politics aside.
Premier Jacinta Allan needs to do what is right for the safety and peace of mind of all Victorians. Voters are not stupid. Do that, and she won’t need her obsession with spin and grandstanding any more.
Neil Mitchell is a radio and TV news analyst, and hosts the weekly podcast, Neil Mitchell Asks Why?
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.