Lisa Owen interviews Police Commissioner Mike Bush
On The Nation:
Lisa Owen
interviews Police Commissioner Mike Bush “You
are acknowledging the fact that when it came to making
subjective decisions that perhaps people in the police force
were coming down harder on Maori that they were coming
across. Says
the police’s policy which saw information being blocked to
sociologist Dr Jarrod Gilbert is “not fit for purpose
now” and “…We will be changing the wording of that
policy and what it’s about…. because we’re determined
to be a very evidence-based police service.” Mike
Bush says police “very ready and very well trained” for
a terror attack in NZ “…the Paris attacks of a
few weeks ago really made us stop and have a look at what
we’re training for, and that will continue to
evolve.” Says police know who the Kiwis are
who’ve been deported back to NZ prior to the new law being
passed, and what crimes they’ve committed Some of
those deported before the recent ‘ConAir’ flights were
violent offenders: “I can’t categorically say there are
murderers, but quite possibly so.”
“There wouldn’t
be a physical register that actually had everyone’s names,
but we could point to who exactly they are.” Says he’s
“concerned as anyone” about the recent increase in
crimes involving violence and guns Categorically
denies allegation he instructed staff to stall the release
of information about burglary statistics Says police
have enough funding despite absorbing $300 million in cost
pressures in the past five years Believes protection
orders are “an effective tool” after more than 3,200
convictions for breaching protection orders in 2014, says
“nothing’s foolproof”
Police
Commissioner admits officers suffer from “unconscious
bias” and have been biased in how they deal with Maori
offenders, but denies racism in the force.
So our data which we collected right from the
start showed that there was a disparity in the way we
applied some of our discretion.
Do you still have a
problem there?
So we’re moving closer to not having a
problem, but you should never be complacent.”
Lisa
Owen: Police Commissioner Mike Bush is the country’s top
cop, responsible for more than 8,000 officers and keeping us
safe from everything from violent crime to domestic
terrorism. Now, the scale of that challenge hit home on
Friday with the appearance of an Islamic State video naming
New Zealand amongst possible targets. Given that video and
the Prime Minister’s comment earlier about the threat of
IS reaching home soil, I started our interview by asking
Mike Bush how prepared police are for an
attack.
Mike Bush: We are very practised and
very ready and very well trained if something does occur in
New Zealand, so we’re really ready to
respond.
As a result of, say, changing threats
overseas, have you been doing more of that or specifically
doing other things to make sure that you’re up to the
mark?
Yes, we keep evolving our training. So the
Paris attacks of a few weeks ago really made us stop and
have a look at what we’re training for, and that will
continue to evolve. But our front-line staff are trained in
a way they’ve never been trained before. But that will
continue to evolve, but our special tactics groups and our
armed offenders groups have been training this way for some
time.
If we come a bit closer to home, there has
been a lot of publicity around these detainees who are
returning from Australia. So, I want to talk about the ones
that came back before the new monitoring law came in and
what’s happened to them. Are you able to watch those
people?
Look, whether they came in the last two
planeloads or whether they came in before, we are aware of
who they are, we are aware of what they’ve done before, we
continue to get more information from our Australian
colleagues, and if they are of a certain category, then they
will be managed and they will be monitored. And we’ve had
very good programmes for monitoring what we would call
high-risk offenders, if, indeed, some of them are
high-risk.
So how many are we talking about and
what kind of categories do they fall in? Are there murderers
and rapists, as the minister has said, in the ones that came
in previously?
My understanding, I can’t be
categorical around this, but there are definitely violent
offenders in the last two planeloads, drug
dealers…
But the ones before, Commissioner?
Before the so-called ‘Con-Air’
flights?
Again, violent offenders, but I can’t
categorically say there are murderers, but quite possibly
so.
So the ones that came in before the two
flights recently, do you have a register? I mean, can you
tell me how many there actually are?
Look, I
could go back and tell you. I don’t have the absolute
figures with me. But we have a record of all people who are
deported to New Zealand. So we work closely
with—
More than 100, more than
150?
Yes, I think it is more than 100,
absolutely.
So, effectively, there is a register
as such of these offenders?
There wouldn’t be
a physical register that actually had everyone’s names,
but we could point to who exactly they are.
Okay.
Well, you’re monitoring these detainees, and that is an
example of the more jobs that you are being asked to do
without extra funding, because, if you look at the figures,
you’ve had to suck up, I think it is, about 300 million in
new costs in the past four years without real budget
increases. So where are you trimming to make ends
meet?
So, the first thing is we have had an
increase in our budget by 41 million recently, but also,
like any good chief executive, I have to make sure that I
spend the public’s purse very responsibly. The other thing
we’ve done recently is through having good technology,
mobile phones and good functionality on those, is take the
bureaucracy out of the business so our staff are far more
proactive.
But you say 41 million. That’s 41
versus the 300 million which is in your own annual report, I
think, and other documentation. That’s a big gap. So have
you saved that much through a few gadgets?
So,
we’ve been really efficient within the organisation, and
to actually get really efficient through good productivity,
we’ve been able to put the equivalent police hours of 350
more front-line staff on the streets in the last few years
through doing those things. And that’s why you will see
more police officers out there.
Okay, because, I
think, by mid next year, you’re also having to add a whole
new unit to monitor sex offenders with the sex-offenders
register that’s coming in, and presumably, you’ve made
the cuts and efficiencies that you’re talking about. At
some point, there’ll be no more efficiencies that you can
make, and you’ve got basically around the same amount of
money. Doesn’t it then become an issue of people
questioning, ‘Is this compromising the public’s
safety?’ Are you trimming that much?
If I
thought there was any compromise, I would be saying
so.
Well, also in notes that you’ve provided
for the minister, you acknowledge that Maori are
overrepresented as offenders and you say that this could be
because of unconscious bias. So you’re acknowledging,
what, racism in the force?
I think like any good
organisation, you have to recognise that there can be some
unconscious bias in your organisation, so we’ve recently
started some training with the executive which will filter
through the rest of the organisation, because the first
thing you have to do is acknowledge that it exists. Now, we
collect data about how we use our discretion, and we want to
make sure that our staff a) acknowledge that every human has
unconscious bias and how to deal with that so that we
don’t apply any unconscious bias to any demographic,
because it’s really important that we are absolutely fair
because we serve everyone in the community.
But
when you use that phrase ‘unconscious bias’ when
you’re talking about Maori, you mean ‘racism’, don’t
you? That’s what you mean.
Unconscious bias,
we’ve spent quite a bit of time getting to understand
that, and it does not mean that. It’s something that
everyone inherently has, and it’s important that as police
officers and professionals, we know how to understand that
and ensure that we don’t practise unconscious
bias.
Because looking at the stats, there’s 46%
of police apprehensions are Maori, 50%-plus of police
prosecutions involve Maori, 60% of Youth Court. You would
know these figures, I’m sure. And 50%-plus of prisoners
are Maori. You’ve said that you’ve got to be careful
about how you use your discretion. Have you got a problem
there at the moment in exercising that
discretion?
I think we did, because we collected
data right from the start when we started applying something
called alternate resolutions, and we saw that there was a
bias. So in talking to my people, I wanted them to
understand that there could be an unconscious bias and how
we deal with it. And I can say since we
started—
So being tougher on Maori, you mean by
that? Being tougher on Maori when you had a discretion to
make a decision?
So as we apply it, and it was
really great to see our staff recognise that that perhaps
could be something that existed within the organisation, and
I can say and it’s really positive, since we started
having those conversations and talking about it, that the
dynamic has really changed. So we’re getting far closer to
that equality that should be there.
I want to be
clear about this, because I think it’s really important
for people watching. You are acknowledging the fact that
when it came to making subjective decisions that perhaps
people in the police force were coming down harder on Maori
that they were coming across.
So our data which
we collected right from the start showed that there was a
disparity in the way we applied some of our
discretion.
Do you still have a problem
there?
So we’re moving closer to not having a
problem, but you should never be complacent. So we’re
doing so much to try and work with iwi and Maori to change
that overrepresentation, and the representation you’re
talking about is also applying to victims, to ensure that
they’re not overrepresented as victims.
Another
area of concern that you’ve identified is violent crime.
Why do you think that’s still increasing?
So
violent crime is increasing in terms of family
violence.
Yes.
And as we know, family
violence occurs across every demographic, and no one is
immune from it or no community or no demographic is immune.
And what is pleasing is that the tolerance for family
violence is decreasing, and that’s why we’re having an
increase in reporting.
We talk about family
violence there. More than half of violent crime happens in
the home as family violence. There were more than 3200
convictions for breaching protection orders in 2014, so
that’s largely affecting women, who are being injured and,
in some cases, dying. The protection orders don’t seem to
be working. Why do you think that is?
So,
there’s a number of steps, so protection orders will work
in most occasions, but what we have to do is work to ensure
that we do everything to keep particularly women and
vulnerable children safe from this violence. So protection
orders are one method. Nothing’s foolproof.
But
when you look at those breaches of protection orders and
those are just the convictions, is that— are they not
working because of poor policing, or are they an ineffective
tool?
No, they’re an effective tool, but
nothing’s always effective, so we have to do multiple
things.
The Police Association is convinced that
there is a spike in incidents involving firearms, and it
feels that this has not yet shown up in your statistics,
that there is a lag. Do you think that that’s
possible?
One firearm incident is one too many,
and we’ve had a number in recent times, and we’ve done a
lot in that space around equipping our staff with tasers and
making sure they’ve got immediate access to
guns…
Yeah, but do you think they’re
right?
They’re training.
Do you
think they’re right about the
statistics?
I’m concerned as anyone about the
recent increase in crimes involving violence and guns, and
that’s why we monitor that environment to make sure our
people are safe so they can keep the community
safe.
Look, you’ve been under fire this week
for contracts that you impose on academics who are using
your data and resources. I’m just wondering how on earth
you can be promoting transparency and free thought and even
learning from things within your own organisation if you
hold a veto over research, when you can require researchers
to amend their findings if they’re negative or not
constructive, or you can blacklist them. How can that be
encouraging sort of open, free research and exchange of
ideas?
So, what’s happened in the last week
has caused us to really have a look at our policy. It was
possibly fit for purpose at one stage. It’s not fit for
purpose now. We work in a dynamic environment. So that’s
being reviewed as we speak, both the policy and the decision
that was made in respect of Dr Jarrod Gilbert, and I’m
sure you’ll hear more about our review of that next week.
But it’s also important to point out that the intent of
that was to keep people’s information private, and
that’s why we have some policies and rules.
But
people— the public who are looking at that would say if
they were to look at the agreement, that is more than
protecting people’s privacy; it’s about keeping a lid on
things that are negative for the police or maybe perceived
as negative for the police.
Yeah, that’s why
we will be changing the wording of that policy and what
it’s about, because the frustrating thing is it’s the
opposite that’s true in terms of where we’re at at the
moment. We’re wanting to build great relationships with
academia because we’re determined to be a very
evidence-based police service.
One last thing I
want to ask you about before I go, Commissioner. Last night
I spoke to the ombudsman about a complaint that relates to
you. It’s an allegation that you instructed staff to let
an Official Information Act request sit to stall the release
of information relating to doctored burglary stats. So I
want to give you the opportunity to answer to that. Did you
do that?
Absolutely not. For obvious reasons, I
kept myself well away from everything that was going on in
that space because I was the district commander at the time.
So that’s absolutely not correct, and, yeah, I distance
myself for obvious reasons.
Okay, well, I’m
wondering why a police officer would record in his job sheet
that you did do that, then. Is that person lying when they
say that you did, and I’ve got the job sheet here if you
needed to refresh your memory. The job sheet says , ‘The
direction to me was not to respond to the Official
Information Act request and file the file as it is.’ Have
you seen it? I’ve got it.
I have seen it,
yeah.
Yeah. So was that officer lying
or…?
That officer is absolutely incorrect.
That did not occur.
So why would that officer
write that on a job sheet?
I have no idea, but I
can say it’s absolutely incorrect.
Transcript provided
by Able. www.able.co.nz