'PARTNERSHIPS - CAN'T LIVE WITH THEM, CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT THEM' Yvonne Korn National Campaign Against Violence and Crime

Transcription

1 'PARTNERSHIPS - CAN'T LIVE WITH THEM, CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT THEM' Yvonne Korn National Campaign Against Violence and Crime Paper presented at the conference Partnerships in Crime Prevention, convened jointly by the Australian Institute of Criminology and the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime and held in Hobart, February

2 Introduction When my parents came to Australia in 1950 by boat as Jewish refugees after the Second World War, they left behind them one of the greatest injustices and crimes committed in our recent history. But they had formed a new partnership, with each other, and were soon to form a life long relationship with the 'new world' - a land they thought was safe and free, as far away from Europe as they could possibly go. Australia is still one of the safest countries in the world by most standards but crime is complex, and preventing it requires partnerships of many types - between individuals, between organisations, between sectors and most importantly between all of us here working to rid our society of the many injustices that still remain and return to haunt us. U.K. experience From the mid eighties I spent over 10 years working in the U.K. setting up and managing crime prevention programs and watching progress slow and sure on the ground as cities and towns became safer. I sat in innumerable meetings, debated issues till the cows came home and negotiated countless deals. I got away with a lot being 'the Australian who always spoke her mind' and I continued to bring people together whose paths would not normally cross. Chairmen of multinationals with residents of high crime housing estates, bosses of privatised public utilities with victims of domestic violence - and world views began to change. My colleagues and I worked hard to form new and enduring partnerships between those who could make a difference to crime and the safety of many lives. We lured them to the table, sometimes with inducements, sometimes with threats of embarrassment - but in the end, they came. They crossed boundaries, they developed shared visions, they changed priorities, they consulted, they listened and they took action. Who were they? Police, Government, corporate people, non government and community representatives. People from health, education, youth services, housing and more, even the landed gentry - whoever was needed to get the job done. Just like all of you here today at this conference. But it was bloody hard work - because true partnership work on crime prevention or in any field is really difficult. I was thinking of a suitable analogy when preparing for this conference and it suddenly struck me that the analogy was within the word 'partnership' itself - it is like travelling on a 'ship'. We embark on a new and exciting journey (just like my parents did many years ago) to a new and foreign land - our goal to make our societies safer. The journey is often beset with troubled waters, storms, mishaps - hopefully no shipwrecks - and we're often becalmed, feel we've lost our way. But then we see land and we've made it - ready for the next adventure. Australian context and challenges That was a bit like I felt when I returned to Australia two years ago to run the Commonwealth Government's new national crime prevention initiative and more recently the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime (NCAVAC). A new exciting adventure but surely I thought, what had worked 'over there' would work 'over here' - little did I know. I should have started taking the sea sick tablets straight away! I knew the content and landscape of the crime problems would be different and that solutions would need tailoring but I was convinced (and still am) that the 2

3 principles for successful outcomes would be the same. I do however remember some very clear warnings that were fed my way: "The Commonwealth has no jurisdictional responsibility for crime prevention and you'll never get the States and Territories to agree to do anything cooperatively". (It was probably someone in this audience who shared that pearl with me). Innocently I retorted - "Why not?" and was met with a surprised look of horror. The next helpful insight I was given, was about the Commonwealth itself - something along the lines of : "One bit of the Commonwealth Government doesn't know what the other bit's doing and when it comes to crime, they probably cause more than they prevent!" Now this didn't seem too implausible having worked in large bureaucracies before, but again I didn't see it as insurmountable. The third and fourth insights I actually found more disturbing than the previous two : "It's impossible to sit around a table with government and non government colleagues and agree a plan of action because the latter are always going on about services and cuts and can't think of the bigger picture." And "You can't trust services that have volunteers working in them - they're unprofessional, have no standards, and cause more damage than good." Funnily, noone said anything about the corporate or business sector - probably because they never even cross their minds, let alone work in partnership with them. So what was all of this telling me? There were a number of challenges ahead, that the landscape was very different to Britain, that we would have to break new ground and that we needed to be careful but bold every step of the way. And I continue to say 'why not?' as obstacles and objections are placed in our path! NCAVAC Partnerships So what are some of the partnerships that NCAVAC is part of in this national effort to prevent crime and violence? I never argue with the fact that the States and Territories have primary responsibility for preventing crime but I strongly dispute the assertion that they cannot be brought together to work cooperatively for the national good. We have a true living and breathing partnership of all the States and Territories and the Commonwealth in the Lead Ministers' National Anti Crime Strategy. An interesting partnership for its mixture of Police Ministers and Attorneys-General. The officials' group of staff from Police services and AG's departments have worked tirelessly over the last two years to come up with a set of national crime prevention priorities and projects that we are pursuing together. This partnership was set up before the Commonwealth came along but I do believe that the Commonwealth has played a key role in its work in providing some resourcing, additional expertise, pressure to try out cross jurisdictional activity and shaping some of the long term vision. There will be a number of presentations at the conference on the work that NACS and NCAVAC are doing together, from researchers, consultants and government staff. 3

4 We've also been keen to establish what I call bi lateral partnerships with our government colleagues and have done so through our capacity building stream. Here we have provided a small amount of funding to support the existing crime prevention work being done by our colleagues. We hope to extend this work into other sectors over the coming year. But what of the involvement of other sectors in our crime prevention work at a local and strategic level? I was puzzled at the absence of local government from both the national and many State led strategies. It was however clear that some States were beginning to work more closely with local government to harness crime prevention resources but that this was a new and developing area. And more often local government was taking action off its own bat with little support from State government. We have had discussions with ALGA, the peak local government organisation, to see how we can generate more strategic activity at a local level - and help people learn of ideas quickly without having to reinvent the wheel. We also hope to include them in our national groupings. There are ofcourse a number of agencies from the non government and community sectors carrying out good crime prevention work but no strong national movement. This is something NCAVAC hopes to address over the coming year. And the business sector are fairly new players in this field. NRMA has led the way to some extent and more are following. Much work has been done in the liqour licensing field and overseas significant partnerships have been formed with the corporate sector to support youth crime prevention activity. We are looking to explore some of this potential here, both in terms of projects on the ground that affect businesses themselves and more globally. And at the Commonwealth level, we have formed an Interdepartmental Working Group of all relevant departments and are looking at ways of ensuring that our government policies maximise their crime and violence potential and don't do the opposite. We support related departmental programs such as youth homelessness, youth suicide, domestic violence prevention and so on, and have formed cross departmental partnerships to undertake joint work. And our links with academic institutions, criminologists and sociologists have grown quickly - many are carrying out our research and demonstration consultancies and are here today. And finally the media - we're trying to get a range of messages out there : that crime is not out of control, that young people are not on the rampage, that there are plenty of effective strategies to keep yourself and property safer and that people are not as frightened as some might like us to believe. This work is ongoing. Successful crime prevention partnerships But what is really behind the essence of successful crime prevention partnership activity when you get down to it? There are in fact many components that I have experienced and observed and that I'm sure will be familiar to many of you in the audience. Let me list some of these now and I'm sure you can add to them yourselves: * Shared vision of goals and outcomes 4

5 * Correct analysis of crime problems in the area so we know what we're up against * Rational researched solutions to a wide range of crime and associated problems * Leadership and perseverance * A willingness to listen to new ideas, involve the community and consult widely * Coordination of agency activity in the field to maximise existing resources and expertise - doing more with less * Spreading the costs across organisations and sectors, and sharing the credit when things go well * Adopting a cross discipline and holistic approach - this needs to be reflected in the membership of the partnership itself * Staff who are dedicated to actioning what the partnership decides with suitable authority * Respect for different views, approaches, agendas and above all patience for different ways of working * A preparedness to take risks, stretch the boundaries, shake up the status quo * A commitment to action and monitoring and evaluation * Clearly agreed but flexible structures for decision making with all the tensions that that brings * Articulated lines of responsibility for action which reflect the fact that we don't always have to do everything together - only when it's appropriate * A willingness to put in place measures that will have medium and long term impact, not just short term successes * And a true desire to learn from others and not reinvent the wheel. So have I seen examples of crime prevention partnerships here in Australia which have these core elements? Some but each is different in its own special way and only those working within them will really know whether they have the right combination to really make a difference. And the fact is that none of us can prevent violence and crime alone - crime is complex, its effects are long reaching and its prevention requires concerted and coordinated effort by many people pulling in the same direction. We have no choice but to continue working together across all levels but I think as a precaution I'll keep taking the seasick tablets! 5