Page 2871 - Week 08 - Thursday, 17 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
OMCG activities, particularly as those criminal activities evolve. This involves an ongoing conversation between the ACT government and ACT Policing about what tools and resources, including new laws, could assist police to target OMCGs. Indeed, at our most recent briefing I asked the acting CPO if “ACT Policing felt supported enough by the resources and tools provided by Government”. His response was: “Yes, we do.”
As previously advised to the Assembly, the government is exploring the introduction of fortification removal laws. The ACT does not currently have laws which prohibit the establishment of fortifications or require them to be removed. Fortifications are structures designed to stop or hinder uninvited entry to premises. Fortifications may provide OMCGs with time to vacate premises, delay police entry and frustrate the execution of search warrants through the destruction of evidence. Laws allowing police to apply for an order which requires fortifications to be removed or modified will provide an additional tool to assist police to effectively target serious and organised crime.
As foreshadowed by the Chief Minister in his address to the Assembly on the government’s legislative priorities this year, I have also committed to working with the Attorney-General and my cabinet colleagues to bring forward a discussion on legislative options to assist police to target serious and organised crime. We intend for this to include a new offence directly addressing drive-by shootings to ensure that this behaviour is subject to an appropriately serious penalty; new crime scene powers; and firearm prohibition orders. A specific offence addressing drive-by shootings would subject this dangerous behaviour to a serious penalty, even if it cannot be shown that a particular individual was the target of the shooting. This would make it clear to OMCGs that the community rejects this behaviour.
ACT Policing has identified that specific powers to secure a crime scene to protect evidence while obtaining a search warrant would be a beneficial measure. A recent incident where bullets were fired into the walls and windows of a house demonstrated a gap in the law in the ACT, as ACT Policing officers were unable to either enter the house or establish a crime scene until a search warrant was obtained. If the occupants of a house in this scenario subsequently tamper with evidence while police are obtaining a search warrant, this impacts on the ability of ACT Policing and forensic specialists to examine the scene. I will work with my cabinet colleagues to examine crime scene powers and consider possible solutions to address this issue.
Firearm prohibition orders could allow for specified persons to be prohibited from possessing a firearm, firearm parts or ammunition. Once an order is made, it would allow police to search the order subject, their vehicle and premises to determine if they have committed an offence contrary to the order. ACT Policing has advised that firearm prohibition orders could greatly assist in the proactive and agile targeting of persons currently engaged in OMCGs and associated criminal activity and help to reduce firearms related violence.
The ACT government will not step away from our commitment to the safety of our community and will continue to ensure that ACT Policing is effectively resourced and has the right tools to meet the challenges it faces ahead. But neither will we respond
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video