Page 3745 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 29 October 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Indeed the advice I have from the Chief Police Officer is that the current arrangements are satisfactory, and there is no need to change them at this time. So Mr Hanson can beat the drum on what he might consider to be a popular law and order issue, but the facts are that the current arrangements in relation to the deployment of tasers to police officers in the ACT reflect the position of and the advice to the government from the Chief Police Officer.
Perhaps Mr Hanson needs to be a bit more reflective of that when we hear some of the silly language we have heard from him this morning. There is no doubt that police face many difficult and dangerous situations in carrying out their operational duties. They are permitted to use force in circumstances according to law, and have a number of options available to them when faced with a situation when the use of force is necessary. One of those options is a taser, and their use was adopted by ACT Policing to complement other less-than-lethal police response options.
The use of force by ACT Policing is governed by the Australian Federal Police Commissioner’s Order No 3. The police are able to use force under common law and under a range of legislative provisions. All force must be reasonable, and the AFP Commissioner’s order defines this as “the minimum force reasonably necessary in the circumstances to resolve a particular incident”. Ultimately, the question of whether the degree of force used was reasonable is a matter for the courts to decide, and there is considerable legal precedent which provides a clear framework as to how courts reach that decision. This informs the training and advice provided to police.
When tasers were adopted by the AFP in 2004, following an 18-month trial, their issue and use were confined to a very limited number of highly trained police. In October 2010 the AFP commenced a review into the potential expansion of the use of tasers to front-line or general duties police in the ACT.
A major reason for this review was the increasing number of front-line incidents where ACT police were required to use force to resolve situations. I agreed to a formal review by the AFP operational safety committee, the AFP body that considers changes in policy relating to the use of force by AFP members.
The review considered a number of factors, including the risks associated with the use of tasers; community perceptions, including the current social environment; the operational safety of officers, particularly those working in front-line positions; and two incidents which occurred during the course of the review involving a discharge of a firearm by ACT police in operational circumstances.
As a result of that review, the recommendation of the operational safety committee was that tasers be rolled out and made available to front-line operational sergeants. That took place in 2011.
Mr Hanson predicates his rationale for this motion on the ground that if tasers are more widely available then the use of firearms or the need to resort to a firearm will decline. But that is actually not supported by the evidence. The New South Wales Ombudsman reported in 2012 on the use of tasers by New South Wales Police. That
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video